header-logo header-logo

Illegality defence

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll