Can be rebutted

Not since Equality Act 2010

Can be rebutted

Rebuttable by evidence of intention

Does not apply to transfer of land

Abrahams v Trustee in Bankruptcy of Abrahams (1999)

Parrott v Parkin [2007]

Family home

unless over 18

including in loco parentis

Weak and easily rebutted

NOT wife to husband

Weak and easily rebutted

NOT unmarried partners

House in T's name as M claiming benefits

Resulting trust in M's favour

M did not need to refer to illegality to make her case

Father transferred shares to son to deceive creditors

Illegal purpose never carried into effect

Resulting trust in favour of father

If third party deceived, would not apply

Court would have discretion to refuse trust

Surplus left for worthy causes

Failed as not charitable

Surplus held on resulting trust for donors

Did not follow Gillingham

Unincorporated assoc'n dissolved

Non-charitable purpose

Members subs

Proceeds of entertainment

Anonymous contributions

Identifiable donations

Surplus funds were bona vacantia

Should surplus funds have gone to members?

Surplus funds on dissolution of unincorp assoc

Follow assoc rules if there are any

Or divide between current members

Except in rare cases where donation deemed to be trust

Gifts to non-charitable assocs normally construed as gifts to members

Fund for maintenance of two old ladies

Surplus held on resulting trust for donors

Fund for education of children

Surplus belonged to children

Intention was to benefit the children

Vandervell

Express trust to pay dividends failed, leading to resulting trust

Was a resulting trust all along, with a mandate to pay dividend