Moss orally declared himself trustee of 50 of his 950 shares in a private company for Hunter's benefit. The Court of Appeal held that a trust of intangible property (shares) does not fail for uncertainty of subject matter even when the specific shares are not segregated from the larger holding, distinguishing tangible chattels.

Re Hallett's Estate established the fundamental principle in trust law that when a trustee wrongfully mixes trust money with their own funds, the beneficiary can claim the mixed fund or any traceable proceeds. This case created the important rule that a trustee cannot profit from their breach by claiming they spent the trust money first.

Tinsley v Milligan established that a party can recover property held under an illegal trust if they can prove their equitable interest without relying on the illegality. The case clarified the application of the 'reliance principle' in cases involving illegal transactions between joint participants.

Keech v Sandford established the fundamental principle that trustees cannot profit from their position of trust, even where no fraud or bad faith is involved. A trustee who renewed a lease for his own benefit after being unable to renew it for the trust was held accountable for the profits, creating a cornerstone rule of fiduciary duty.

The Court of Appeal established a single test for knowing receipt: whether the recipient's knowledge made it unconscionable to retain the benefit.

The Court of Appeal established the test for third party liability in breach of trust cases, requiring either dishonest assistance or knowing receipt.

Knight v Knight established the three certainties required for the creation of a valid trust in English law. The case laid down the fundamental principle that there must be certainty of intention, certainty of subject matter, and certainty of objects for a trust to be legally enforceable.

House of Lords clarifies tracing rules for mixed trust funds

House of Lords decision establishing the doctrine of secret trusts, holding that equity will enforce secret trusts to prevent fraud, even though they appear to contradict statutory formality requirements for wills.

Milroy v Lord established the fundamental principle that for a gift to be valid, it must be completely constituted either by transfer of legal title (whether to the donee outright or to trustees) or by declaration of trust. The case demonstrates that an imperfect gift cannot be saved by treating it as a declaration of trust unless there is clear evidence of such intention.

Bribe proceeds held on constructive trust from moment of receipt by fiduciary

Strong v Bird established the rule that an imperfect gift can be perfected where the intended donee later becomes the donor's executor. This case created an important exception to the general rule that equity will not assist a volunteer to perfect an imperfect gift.

Fiduciaries must account for unauthorized profits despite acting honestly

Court creates personal remedy against innocent recipients of wrongly distributed estate funds

Pennington v Waine established that equity can perfect an imperfect gift of shares even without formal transfer where it would be unconscionable to allow the donor to resile from the gift. The case significantly relaxed the strict requirements for share transfers by allowing equitable intervention in appropriate circumstances.

Mistaken payments create immediate constructive trusts giving equitable proprietary interests.

Morice v Bishop of Durham established the fundamental principle that charitable trusts must have purposes that are sufficiently certain and capable of being carried out by the court. The case created the foundational test for charitable trust validity and the cy-près doctrine in English law.

Saunders v Vautier established that adult beneficiaries of a trust who are of sound mind and absolutely entitled can call for the trust property to be transferred to them, even if this terminates the trust earlier than the settlor intended. This fundamental principle gives beneficiaries significant control over trust assets.

A testamentary gift failed for uncertainty where the testator left 'the bulk of my residuary estate' to trustees. The court held that 'bulk' was too vague to constitute a valid trust.

Contractual licences with equity can bind third party purchasers with notice

House of Lords decision establishing the four heads of charity based on the Charitable Uses Act 1601. This foundational case created the classification system that dominated charity law for over a century.

The Court of Appeal held that a half-secret trust fails if the terms communicated to trustees differ from those specified in the will.

Directors are liable for wrongful trading when continuing business without reasonable prospect of avoiding liquidation.

Brightman J held that gifts to unincorporated associations can be valid as gifts to members beneficially, applying the contract-holding theory. This provided a solution for gifts to associations that would otherwise fail as purpose trusts.

Woman gains property interest through detrimental reliance despite no financial contribution

The Court of Appeal held that a resulting trust can be extinguished by the trustee's subsequent conduct showing intention to hold on express trust terms.

House of Lords revolutionizes trust law by requiring causation for breach claims

Roxburgh J held that non-charitable purpose trusts are generally void for lack of beneficiaries who can enforce them. The case established the beneficiary principle as a fundamental requirement for private trusts.

Danckwerts J held that a secret trust beneficiary can witness a will without invalidating their interest, as secret trusts operate outside the Wills Act.

Re Denley's Trust Deed established the validity of purpose trusts that confer direct benefits on ascertainable individuals, creating an exception to the rule against non-charitable purpose trusts. The case involved a trust to maintain recreational facilities for employees, which was held valid because the employees had sufficient interest to enforce it.

Theft conviction upheld despite valid civil law gift transfer

Total failure of consideration allows recovery of payments under frustrated contracts.

Contractual purchasers in actual occupation can claim overriding interests under Land Registration Act 1925.

Foresight of consequences is evidence of intention, not intention itself.

Beneficiaries' occupation rights cannot override trustees' statutory sale powers

Confidential information cannot be stolen as it does not constitute property under theft law.