header-logo header-logo

21 March 2025 / Mark Pawlowski
Issue: 8109 / Categories: Features , Property , Trusts
printer mail-detail

Declaration of trust: is it conclusive?

211933
Can an express declaration of trust be varied informally by a common intention constructive trust? By Mark Pawlowski
  • Explores a recent High Court decision that calls into question the orthodox view on express declared trusts.
  • Questions how the courts will seek to reconcile the need for clarity in this area.

The orthodox view, until recently, has been that an express trust is conclusive of the parties’ intentions regarding beneficial ownership of the family home, irrespective of whether the contributions to purchase are made at the time of acquisition of the property or at a later date. In other words, an express declared trust precludes the possibility of a common intention constructive trust based on differential contributions to the purchase price until the declared trust is formally varied by subsequent agreement or displaced by the informal mechanism of proprietary estoppel. However, a recent High Court decision, Nilsson v Cynberg [2024] EWHC 2164 (Ch), has called this orthodoxy into question.

The orthodox view

The point is specifically addressed

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll