Langley v Carey

[2008] WASCA 207

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Trusts
2. › Express trusts
3. › Creation of trust
4. › Intention to create trust
5. › Inference of intention from circumstances
6. › Whether deposit of money into account styled as trust account evidenced intention to create trust
1. Trusts
2. › Express trusts
3. › Creation of trust
4. › Implied declaration of trust
5. › Trustee adding own property to existing trust fund
6. › Whether addition of funds to existing trust accounts constituted implied declaration of trust
1. Trusts
2. › Presumption of advancement
3. › Scope of presumption
4. › Whether presumption arises where no legal title transferred to child
5. › Requirement for transfer of legal interest
1. Evidence
2. › Admissibility
3. › Declarations of intention
4. › Subsequent declarations admissible only as admissions against interest
5. › Distinction between pre-transaction and post-transaction statements

Quick Take

The presumption of advancement cannot arise where a father deposits money into a bank account in his own name as trustee for his children, because no legal title to any property passes to the children — the depositor acquires a chose in action (right to repayment) in his own name. However, a trust may still be found on the basis of inferred intention from the totality of the circumstances, including the styling of accounts as trust accounts, the addition of funds to pre-existing trust accounts, and contemporaneous statements.