- Internal Code :
- Subject Code :
- University :
- Subject Name : Law
John Alexander’s Clubs Pty Limited v White City Tennis Club Limited
A person tends to make a will in order to give a control to other who benefits from their estate. A person is said to involve all their financial and material assets or any debts or liabilities in the estate. In order to make a will that is legally valid, it must be signed with the presence of witnesses. This makes it legally binding by the law itself. A legal solicitor or professional is appointed to carry out and for formalizing a legal will. And when the property is being transferred to the other person by the owner, it is regulated under land law or property law, to carry out the best of the interest from that legally binding will. The system involves the rules and regulations of the law which are related to the property rights, the interest and responsibilities of the people regarding the things. These things include properties or the rights to have a possession or ownership over an object.
The law applies in this context is the property law. Property law establishes a system entitling the evidence, recognition and transfer of the title of land, and also facilitates its use as an instrument economically. This is the system made to reduce the acts of fraud (Breskvar v Wall)[1] with respect to land or property which happens due to some falsification of the title deeds. The Real Property Act[2] is an act of the Parliament of South Australia, which states that this is an act which is being made to simplify the rules and laws that are related to the transfer or encumbrance of freehold and other interests in Land. In Australia law, the person who makes the will must specify his intentions for the applicability of the will to the assets in the Australia only. While dealing with the property ownership, the courts tend to take into consideration the manner of holding the Certificate of title.
However, there are such circumstances where some interests that are equitable in nature, in the property, could be claimed by the other persons. Such as where a party holds the property or a part of a property on trust for the other person, it states that the ownership of the property is not the same as it appears on the Certificate of Title. This is being done when a trust is being made. A trust is said to be an arrangement in which the property is being held in trust, known as the trustee, for such benefits of the other persons, knows as beneficiary. It means a trustee controls the trust in which the property is being held. Beneficiary gets the benefits out of that trust. A trust is the relationship which is created when a person is entitled to hold a property or the rights of property on behalf of or for the benefits of the other person. It also helps various vulnerable groups of the society, such as women. It is used to allow women to have the certain and specific rights of ownership of the land.
Fiduciary relationships (Bristol and West Building Society v Mothew)[3] are said to be the obligations which consists the set of rules and principles which a trustee has to follow while holding a trust. The trustee holds the property with these fiduciary obligations in order to ensure that the actions are done in an honest, equitable and reasonable way. These obligations ensure that the trustee does not use their position for his own benefits (John Alexander’s Clubs Pty Limited v White City Tennis Club Limited)[4]. In these relationships, trustee owns certain obligations such as he is not entitled to enter into transactions which may involve any kind of conflict of interests in between his personal interests and duty, and the trustee must inform about any improper gain obtained through the conflict of interests.
In this scenario, Rick has made a will which contains the facts and figures regarding the transfer of his properties among his known persons. He made clear in the will that $700,000 is being left to his best friends Sam and Carl “absolutely”. Another provision was contained in the will wherein which he has left his building containing the nightclub in Chelsea, Rick’s Café Americain to Louis “on trust for purposes”. Later, a memorandum and a letter was found containing the information of holding of property of building and $500,000 on trust for Lisa. Rick had made his intentions clear about disposing of his property after his death. The property of building and the cash was to be held on trust by his friends for the benefits of Rick’s girlfriend, Lisa. The property of the building is being under the trust of Louis wherein which Louis would be considered as the trustee and Lisa would be the beneficiary. Lisa would also be entitled to be a beneficiary with respect to $500000 which the Rick had put in trust of Sam and Carl.
Hence in this case, Lisa would be allowed to terminate this fiduciary relationship in order to get the full possession of the property and the cash which was given by Rick in to the trust of his friends, for her benefits. This rule has been specified in the Saunders v Vautier[5], it was held that the beneficiaries of the trust has the right to terminate the relationship and the obligations when he has an absolute indefeasible interest vested in the property of the trust, he is of full capacity i.e. has attained the 18 years of age and is not suffering from any legal disability, and he has an unanimously consent for the termination of the trust. Also, as being held in Beck v Henley[6], termination of the trust is allowed in a situation where the beneficiary is capable of holding the property and its transactions under his control.
Lisa can show the evidence to the court such as the will and the signed memorandum declaring the facts of transferring the property of building into the trust of Louis for the benefit to be given to Lisa. The unsent letter of the Rick can also be a part of proof where the facts and information is written for establishing of $500000 in a trust of Sam and Carl for the benefits of Lisa. Thus Lisa has the right to terminate this trust so that she can attain the full control and possession of the Property and the Cash as well. She can prove by giving the evidences that favor her in terms of attaining or receiving the $500,000 out of $700,000 which the Rick had mentioned in his letter and the property of the building (containing the night club).
Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Law Assignment Help