Skip to main content
United States
Jump To
Support
Register or Log In
Support
Register or Log In
Instructors
Browse Products
Getting Started
Students
Browse Products
Getting Started
Return to Land Law: Directions 8e Resources
Chapter 9 Self-test questions
Quiz Content
*
not completed
.
S.53(I)(b) of the LPA 1925 requires that, in order to be enforceable, declarations of trusts of land must be manifested and proved in writing and signed by the settlor (or testator in a will). Which of the following types of trust must comply with this requirement? Please select all that apply.
Any trust of land, however that trust arises
correct
incorrect
Constructive trusts of land
correct
incorrect
Resulting trusts of land
correct
incorrect
Express trusts of land
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
A direct contribution to the purchase price of a property will always give rise to the presumption of a resulting trust.
True
correct
incorrect
False
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
Which of the following statements is correct? Contributions towards household expenses:
always give the claimant an equitable interest under an express common intention constructive trust.
correct
incorrect
always give the claimant an equitable interest under an inferred common intention constructive trust.
correct
incorrect
always give the claimant an equitable interest under a resulting trust.
correct
incorrect
None of the above.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
In a sole legal owner case, where a non-legal owner claimant is seeking to establish that she or he has an equitable share in the property, the court must undertake a two-stage process. Firstly, it must consider whether the claimant has established that she or he has acquired an equitable interest in the property, by means of a trust. Secondly, it must quantify the claimant's share of that equitable interest. These two stages are entirely separate.
True
correct
incorrect
False
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
In order to establish an express common intention constructive trust, the claimant
must
provide which of the following: Please select all that apply.
Evidence of discussions between the parties of their intention to share the equitable ownership of the property.
correct
incorrect
Evidence that the claimant has acted to his or her detriment in the belief that he or she will acquire an interest in the property.
correct
incorrect
Evidence of a written agreement between the parties.
correct
incorrect
Evidence from a third party witness that the parties agreed to share beneficial ownership of the property.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
In order to establish that she or he has suffered detriment in an express common intention constructive trust case, the claimant must provide evidence that she or he has made a direct financial contribution to the purchase price of the property.
True
correct
incorrect
False
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
According to Lord Bridge in
Lloyd's Bank v Rosset
[1991] AC, the only relevant conduct from which the court can infer a common intention to share the beneficial ownership of the property is:
A contribution to the household expenses.
correct
incorrect
A direct financial contribution to the purchase price of the property.
correct
incorrect
Significant work in the property, for example, redecorating it or landscaping the garden.
correct
incorrect
Undertaking household chores.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
In
Stack v Dowden
[2007] UKHL 17, the House of Lords proposed a "holistic approach" to quantification of shares in the beneficial ownership of the family home. Which of the following factors did they suggest could be of relevance to the court in reaching its decision? Please select all that apply.
The parties' respective financial contributions to the family home.
correct
incorrect
Any children of the relationship.
correct
incorrect
The purpose for which the home was required.
correct
incorrect
How the couple paid for the outgoings of the property and other household expenses.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
In
Jones v Kernott
[2011] UKSC 53, the Supreme Court said that the presumption of a joint tenancy was a starting point for the court in trying to ascertain shares in the family home. However, this presumption could be rebutted under certain circumstances. Which of the following circumstances can rebut the presumption? Please select all that apply.
The co-owners paid different amounts towards the purchase of the property.
correct
incorrect
The co-owners had originally had a common intention to own the property other than as joint tenants in equity.
correct
incorrect
The co-owners' common intention to own the property as joint tenants had changed over time.
correct
incorrect
One co-owner did not contribute at all to the purchase price of the property.
correct
incorrect
*
not completed
.
In
Jones v Kernott
[2011] UKSC 53, the Supreme Court said that the court should never consider the "whole course of dealings" between the parties in deciding what would be a fair share of the family home.
True
correct
incorrect
False
correct
incorrect
Previous Question
Submit Quiz
Next Question
Reset
Exit Quiz
Review all Questions
Submit Quiz
Are you sure?
You have some unanswered questions. Do you really want to submit?
Back to top
Printed from , all rights reserved. © Oxford University Press, 2024
Select your Country