header-logo header-logo

01 April 2010 / Caroline Lody , David Hertzell
Issue: 7411 & 7412 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Illegality defence

The complexities of the illegality defence could soon be history. David Hertzell & Caroline Lody explain why

The Law Commission published a final report and draft Bill to reform the illegality defence in trusts law last month. The reforms aim to make the law clearer and less arbitrary. The draft Trusts (Concealment of Interests) Bill applies where a trust has been created to conceal the ownership of property for a criminal purpose, such as where someone “parks” property in someone else’s name to defraud creditors. The Bill provides that in most cases, a claimant beneficiary would be able to rely on their normal right to enforce the trust. However, in exceptional circumstances the courts would have a discretion to give the property to the trustee.

The problem

Calls for law reform arose out of the House of Lords’ decision in Tinsley v Milligan [1994] 1 AC 340. Here a couple bought a house together but registered it in Ms Tinsley’s name only, so that Ms Milligan could unlawfully claim social security

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