Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
Discuss the statement; "The court of appeal decision in Pennington v Waine [FN1] is inconsistent with all previous authorities on imperfect gift and trusts and suggests a shit in policy towards volunteers."
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Mon Feb 09 2004
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
In this essay we are going to discuss the statement; "The court of appeal decision in Pennington v Waine [FN1] is inconsistent with all previous authorities on imperfect gift and trusts and suggests a shit in policy towards volunteers." As Arden LJ put it at paragraph 52 of Pennington v Waine [FN1] "This appeal raises the question of what is necessary for the purpose of a valid equitable assignment of shares by way of a gift;" Thus in this essay we shall assess the extent to which this judgment is consistent or inconsistent with regards to the constitution of gifts and trusts. In order to do so we shall first have to establish the law with regards to the constitution of gifts and trusts prior to Pennington v Waine [FN1]. Though this is not the full extent of the statement in consideration, in addition we must address the position of volunteers post...
To see the full version of this document, and 145,320 others
