Oxford BA: Express Trusts & Formalities Exam Paper

Amelia, a wealthy art collector, announces at her 70th birthday party: 'I want to give my Monet painting to the National Gallery for the public to enjoy.' The following week, she writes in her diary: 'I have decided that my nephew Benedict should hold my shares in Tech Corp Ltd on trust for my grandchildren equally.' Two months later, Amelia emails Benedict stating: 'Please arrange for the Tech Corp shares to be transferred to you as trustee.' Benedict replies: 'I accept.' However, the shares remain registered in Amelia's name. Shortly after, Amelia tells her friend Clara: 'I'm giving you my diamond necklace' and hands Clara a box. Clara opens it expecting the necklace but finds only a handwritten note saying: 'The necklace is in my safety deposit box - you shall have it when I'm satisfied you'll care for it properly.' Three days later, Amelia dies suddenly. The National Gallery, Benedict (on behalf of the grandchildren), and Clara all claim their respective items. Advise the parties.

Critically evaluate the extent to which the formalities requirements in sections 53 and 54 of the Law of Property Act 1925 successfully balance the prevention of fraud against the facilitation of legitimate dispositions.

David, a successful businessman, wishes to establish a trust fund for his three children's education. He executes a formal trust deed declaring himself trustee of £500,000 'for the educational advancement of my children as they may require from time to time.' Six months later, feeling the fund is insufficient, David orally instructs his accountant Emily: 'I want you to hold my shares in Blue Chip Ltd on trust, adding them to the children's education fund.' Emily nods agreement. David then sends a signed letter to his broker: 'Please transfer my Blue Chip Ltd shares to Emily Foster as trustee.' The broker transfers the shares to Emily, who accepts them but is unaware of any trust obligations, believing David is simply gifting them to her personally. Subsequently, David suffers business losses and demands the return of both the original £500,000 and the Blue Chip shares, claiming no valid trusts were created. His wife Frances argues that even if the trusts are invalid, she should receive the property as David's spouse. Meanwhile, the children, now aware of David's original intentions, seek to enforce the trusts. Analyse the validity of the trust arrangements and advise all parties.

To what extent has the doctrine of certainty of objects successfully adapted to modern trust purposes, particularly in light of the decisions in McPhail v Doulton and subsequent case law?