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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll