* not completed

. Would equity perfect the following disposition?
Ian wanted Dell to have his favourite watch and told Dell it was his. Dell was busy and said he would collect it later. Ian then lent the watch to his nephew, Lewis for his graduation, Lewis returned it to Ian the next day. Ian has died and Dell is the executor of Ian's will.

Equity would not perfect the gift. The rule in Strong v Bird would not apply here as the intention to give has not remained unchanged as Ian has treated the watch as if he is the owner, be lending it to Lewis. correct incorrect

Equity would perfect the gift. The rule in Strong v Bird will apply here as Dell has become Ian's executor. correct incorrect

Equity would perfect the gift. Ian has done all that he can to transfer the watch to Dell so the every effort test of re Rose will apply. correct incorrect

The gift fails as there has not been delivery despite the intention to transfer. correct incorrect

* not completed

. After reading the judgment of Lord Scott in Thorner v Major how else would he have been happy to decide the case?

He would have followed his earlier decision in Yeomans Row and conclude that as there was no written contract over the transfer of land, which complied with s2 LP(MP) A, the agreement was not enforceable in law or equity. correct incorrect

He would have been happy to allow the land to be held on a long lease by David Thorner. correct incorrect

He would have been happy to provide that the property could be subject to a remedial constructive trust. correct incorrect

That there had been a valid transfer of legal title to David by Peter Thorner. correct incorrect

* not completed

. How did the courts justify the decision in Choithram International v Pagarani [2001]?

As Mr Pagarani had done all that he could to transfer the property in his lifetime then the courts would apply Re Rose, every effort test. correct incorrect

Had Mr Pagarani lived he would have been compelled by the courts to properly constitute the trust, as his conscience would be affected. So there was no reason not to carry out the transfer to his co-trustees. It was important that as the legal owner he was one of the intended recipient trustees. correct incorrect

Mr Pagarani had left his family very well settled and they did not need any more money but the charity did need the money. correct incorrect

Mr Pagarani had declared himself trustee of the property for the benefit of the charity. correct incorrect

* not completed

. Which of the following situations will be a valid transfer of legal title in land?

Katie gives Luke a deed, which she has signed and has been witnessed saying that she transfers her home to Luke. correct incorrect

Katie gives Luke the deeds to her home, which she has signed on the back saying it is all for Luke. correct incorrect

Katie gives Luke a deed, which she and Luke have signed saying that she transfers her home to Luke. correct incorrect

Katie gives Luke a deed, which she has signed and has been witnessed saying that she transfers her home to Luke and this is registered on the Land Registery. correct incorrect

* not completed

. Why did the courts decide that there was no estoppel in Yeoman's Row Management v Cobbe [2008]?

There was no clear agreement between the parties, there was actually clear evidence that they did not intend to make such an agreement, such as no contract to satisfy s2 LP(MP)A 89, and between two business people there thought sufficient evidence to prevent estoppel. correct incorrect

There was no contract for s2 LP(MP) A so there could be no legal agreement on which to base the estoppel. correct incorrect

That it was being used to form the basis of a claim, so as a sword, rather than as a shield. correct incorrect

That Mr Cobbe had not relied on any assurances by the other parties. correct incorrect