An informal agreement that an investor's capital contribution will be repaid from the net proceeds of sale of a business does not, without more, constitute an equitable assignment of future property giving rise to a trust. The principles in Palette Shoes Pty Ltd v Krohn require a finding that the parties intended to assign the future property, and this must be determined from the real meaning of their agreement. A mere priority arrangement for return of capital is insufficient.
The full text is available to signed-in members.