A trustee has £2,000 of his own money in his deposit account. He puts in £3,000 of Trust B’s money and then £6,000 of Trust C’s money. He spends £6,000 on shares which are now worth £12,000. He then dissipates the remaining £5,000. Later he pays in £1,000. First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds and apply Re Oatway as the later funds are dissipated. This means the £6,000 spent on shares will all be money from the two trusts rather than the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trusts. They share rateably (Re Diplock), so Trust B has 1/3 rd of the shares (now worth £4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 from Trust B and £2,000 from Trust C. This trust money cannot be replaced by the later payment in of £1,000 ([ case ]).
Answer
Roscoe v Winder
Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A trustee has £2,000 of his own money in his deposit account. He puts in £3,000 of Trust B’s money and then £6,000 of Trust C’s money. He spends £6,000 on shares which are now worth £12,000. He then dissipates the remaining £5,000. Later he pays in £1,000. First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds and apply Re Oatway as the later funds are dissipated. This means the £6,000 spent on shares will all be money from the two trusts rather than the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trusts. They share rateably (Re Diplock), so Trust B has 1/3 rd of the shares (now worth £4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 from Trust B and £2,000 from Trust C. This trust money cannot be replaced by the later payment in of £1,000 ([ case ]).
Answer
?
Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A trustee has £2,000 of his own money in his deposit account. He puts in £3,000 of Trust B’s money and then £6,000 of Trust C’s money. He spends £6,000 on shares which are now worth £12,000. He then dissipates the remaining £5,000. Later he pays in £1,000. First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds and apply Re Oatway as the later funds are dissipated. This means the £6,000 spent on shares will all be money from the two trusts rather than the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trusts. They share rateably (Re Diplock), so Trust B has 1/3 rd of the shares (now worth £4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 from Trust B and £2,000 from Trust C. This trust money cannot be replaced by the later payment in of £1,000 ([ case ]).
Answer
Roscoe v Winder
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it 4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 from Trust B and £2,000 from Trust C. This trust money cannot be replaced by the later payment in of £1,000 (<span>Roscoe v Winder).<span><body><html>
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.