What is the ratio in Oughtred v IRC?

Even specifically enforceable oral contracts for equitable interests require separate written disposition to actually transfer beneficial ownership under s53(1)(c).

What did the court decide in Oughtred v IRC?

The House of Lords held that specific enforceability did not circumvent the s53(1)(c) writing requirement for actual disposition of equitable interests.

Why is Oughtred v IRC important for trusts law?

It prevents evasion of statutory writing requirements through contract law, maintaining strict formalities for equitable interest transfers.

What is the ratio in Oughtred v IRC?

Even specifically enforceable oral contracts for equitable interests require separate written disposition to actually transfer beneficial ownership under s53(1)(c).

What did the court decide in Oughtred v IRC?

The House of Lords held that specific enforceability did not circumvent the s53(1)(c) writing requirement for actual disposition of equitable interests.

Why is Oughtred v IRC important for trusts law?

It prevents evasion of statutory writing requirements through contract law, maintaining strict formalities for equitable interest transfers.

Equity & Trusts1 min read

Oughtred v IRC

[1960] AC 206House of Lords1960

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Equity & Trusts cases →

“Contracts for equitable interests need separate written disposition despite specific enforceability”

Facts

Mrs Oughtred made an oral agreement with her son to exchange her life interest in trust property for his reversionary interest. The agreement was specifically enforceable but the Revenue claimed it required written disposition under s53(1)(c).

Issues

Whether a specifically enforceable oral contract to exchange equitable interests operates as a disposition requiring writing under s53(1)(c) LPA 1925

Held

The House of Lords held that despite the contract being specifically enforceable, a separate written disposition was still required under s53(1)(c)

Significance

This case clarified that s53(1)(c) applies even to specifically enforceable contracts, preventing evasion of writing requirements. It's crucial for understanding the strict approach to equitable interest transfers and remains important for trust law formalities.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of Oughtred v IRC. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

Oughtred v IRC [1960] AC 206 (HL)

equitable interestsdispositionspecific performancetrust formalitiesLaw of Property Act 1925

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLB

More Equity & Trusts cases

Yiannakis Chambi v Aristos Aristodemou & Anor

[2026] EWHC 599 (Ch)

Louise Mary Harris & Anor v Neil Quantick & Anor

[2026] EWHC 137 (Ch)

Amaal Ventures Ltd & Anor v Eros Ltd

[2026] EWHC Ch 870

Jonathan Frank Bown v Clive Shipley & Anor

[2026] EWHC 918 (Ch)

Bhattacharya & Anor v Robert Armstrong & Anor

[2026] EWHC Ch 759

Joanna Rich v JDDR Capital Limited

[2026] EWHC 853 (Ch)

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.