s9 Wills Act 1837 requirements. Intention by testator, or person prepared to die intestate, to create trust binding inheritor of their property. Inevitably, however, secret trusts often arise, or are alleged to arise, where the terms of the trust have not been committed to writing in full or at all. An alternative theory is that they arise, dehors, or, outside of the will. In this case, testator statement = 'my wife knows what she has to do with the house' HELD - intention was not clear. On 07/30/2020 Kasperbauer, Laura L filed a Family - Marriage Dissolution/Divorce lawsuit against Kasperbauer, Richard J. What is most significant here was that it was clear that they knew of the existence of their obligation but failed to physically object. It is sufficient that a restraint of trade or monopoly results as the consequence of the defendants' conduct or business arrangements. 2023 Digestible Notes All Rights Reserved. In Titcombe v Ison there was no doubt that the testator had expressed informal wishes regarding her jewellery. Reasons for using secret trusts: A will is a public document so privacy and also flexibility, 3. It was established in Re Boyes[vii] that a testator has to communicate both their intention to establish the fully secret trust and the terms on which the property is to be held to the trustee. The legatee will then hold the property on resulting trust back to the estate. She claimed that as a result Mr Ison now held the jewellery on a bare (secret) trust for her. It only intervenes if there is a risk of an unconscionable result, like the denial of a testators wishes. Re Keen 1937 For HST communication must be before execution of will, in accordance with will and sealed letter is sufficient. In Kasperbauer v Griffith, above 97, the word 'fraud' was not used . It has been further noted by Watt that fully secret trusts are not recognised lightly[xviii] regarding the burden upon claimants attempting to prove the existence of these trusts. Contract to sell land is specifically enforceable where damages is inadequate. Who exactly is it that would be defrauded if the trust were to fail on a statutory formality? See also GardnerS . Additionally, in half secret trusts, if there is more than one trustee, all the trustees need to be told of the testators intentions, and if this is not done, the trust will fail for lack of communication and acceptance. She had no children and, on her death, left her whole estate to her friend, Mr Ison. Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Griffith, No. Thus, even though the trust was communicated and agreed to before the execution of the will, the fact that it was not properly incorporated into the will meant it was void. 40 0 obj <> endobj 42 0 obj <>/XObject<>>>/Contents 43 0 R/StructParents 0/Tabs/S/CropBox[ 0 0 595.2199 841]/Rotate 0>> endobj 43 0 obj <>stream By not naming the beneficiary or beneficiaries of the property, these gifts do not fulfil the requirements of section 9 of the Wills Act 1837 regarding the proper disposal of property on death. Kasperbauer; Griffith v Griffith; Havens; Zorab and Griffith: CA 21 Nov 1997 Citations: [1997] EWCA Civ 2785 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited - Sekhon, etc v Regina CACD 16-Dec-2002 The defendants appealed against confiscation orders on the basis that in various ways, the Crown had failed to comply with procedural requirements. Having detailed the types of secret trust and outlined the formalities required for them to be valid, this essay will now turn to the enforcement of secret and half secret trusts using the equitable principle that statute will not be an instrument of fraud. Ultimately, it will be concluded that this theory, while still is less convincing than the equitable principle, and is perhaps an attempt by some to downplay the significant role the equitable principle plays in enforcing secret trusts. These act as general guidelines as to the operation of equity, rather than operating as strict rules. Why should equity, over a mere matter of words, give effect to them in one case and frustrate them in the other?[xxv], Blackwell v Blackwell[xxvi], described by Watt as a classic instance of a valid half secret trusts[xxvii] is the basis for another noteworthy requirement regarding half secret trusts. Property Law - Easement - Contract for Lease - Way of Necessity. Additionally, this use of the principle illustrates the willingness of equity to contravene statutory principles to achieve a result which the court considers to be in line within the original spirit of an agreement if statute does not allow for this. A secret trust need not be set out in writing: Ottaway v Norman [1972] Ch 698. Read more, 2023 STEP (The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners) is a company limited by guarantee incorporated in England and Wales. P. 334 U. S. 105. By way of illustration, in Kasperbauer v Griffith[xliv], the court refused to uphold a fully secret trust in favour of the testators children as the words used to communicate the trust to his wife were only sufficient to impose a moral, not legal, obligation, upon his wife. Her niece, Mrs Titcombe, brought a claim for jewellery on the basis that Mr Ison had agreed with Ms Richards that, after her death, he would give the jewellery to the claimant. This is not possible in half secret trusts: unlike fully secret trusts, intention is obvious as it is stated in the will. And where the trust alleged has been created informally, a central issue for the Court will often be whether the testator actually intended to create a trust at all. But he denied that she had intended to create a bare trust in the claimants favour. In the second scenario, wherein the legatee understood that they were never intended to keep the property, it is in the interests of their conscience to prevent them from keeping the gift. These requirements are intended to ensure that wills constitute a clear record of how the estate should be distributed after the testators death. [xxxiv] Simon Gardner Two Maxims of Equity (1995) 54 (1) CLJ 60, 61. In support of the assertion that this equitable principle allows the enforcement of secret trusts in good conscience, Watt states that secret trusts are not only useful in their own right; they provide a useful analogy and precedent for anyone attempting to find a way around testamentary formalities. Of course, in one sense, it would indeed not be in good conscience to deny a testator the ability to distribute their estate as they see fit. Tough actively assisting in a breach of trust. There is a school of thought who argues that these trusts operate entirely outside of the will, thus there is no need to consider fraud. Enforcing Secret trusts through the equitable principle: statute and common law shall not be used as an engine of fraud. Kasperbauer v Griffith[iv] illustrates the necessity of intention. The ambulance, which was only 6 miles away, did not arrive until 17.05. Summary . There is still time for both members and non-members to give us your opinion on the Society by completing this survey. 3 Certainties Formalities Constitution Notes, Certainties, Formalities And Constitution Notes, Certainties Formalities Constitution Flow Chart Notes, Constructive Trusts Of Property And Constructive Trusts Of The Home Notes, Income (S 32) And Capital (S 31) Summary Notes, Secret Trusts, Purpose Trusts And Unincorporated Associations Notes, Trustees' Powers, Maintenance & Advancement And Variation Notes. What must be communicated a) Existence of the trust o, Wallgrave v Tebbs: if a trust is to be enforced vs. an apparent absolute legatee then there must be communication of the fact of the trust, If the fact of the trust is communicated inter vivos, the legatee cannot take beneficially as his conscience is bound, Terms as well as its existence must be communicated inter vivos, Re Boyes: terms of the trust were discovered after death in unattested documents - held to not having been properly communicatedCA held that there was a resulting trust to the testator's estate as original trust had not been properly communicated. Some woodland was for sale and the parties agreed that the defendant would bid for it for them both, with the exact proportions on which the land was to be held to be agreed later. However, he denied that Ms Richards had intended to create a bare trust in Mrs Titcombe's favour. See the cases of Stack v Dowden [2007], Gissing v Gissing [1971], and Lloyds Bank v Rosset [1991]. It is the secret nature of these trusts which cause difficulty with their enforcement. %PDF-1.5 % The solicitor did not acquire the details of the trust terms until after the testators death. Kasperbauer v Griffith [2000] Intention by testator or a person prepared to die intestate to create a trust binding on inheritor of their property Communication of the trust to the intended trustee acceptance of the trust by the trustee 3Cs Kasperbauer v Griffith - too vague Following this failure of the trust, there is the question of what will happen to the property. Perhaps the most difficult issue is where the legal owner has responsibility for and meets all the mortgage payments, but is only in a position to do so because the other partner is meeting other household expenses, such as utility bills, maintenance etc. The validity of the half secret trust was challenged by the testators wife who claimed that the whole of the sum was hers. The law did say that if a person kills their parents, the grandchildren of the person killed could not get the benefit either: this was felt a bit unfair, Estates of Deceased Person Act 2011 this says property will skip the killer and go to the next person in line (which could potentially be the grandchildren), Forfeiture Act 1982 forfeiture means you cannot benefit if you kill someone, but s.2 Forfeiture Act gives the court the power to modify the application of the principle in individual cases. See the case of Crabb v Arun District Council [1976]. In order to understand why the courts would permit the enforcement of these trusts, it is important to discuss the rationale behind their use. In response to this, the courts have endeavoured to honour the intentions of the testator. The trust failed as it was not made clear what the trustee was instructed to do with the property. The claimant was having an asthma attack. First in Kasperbauer v Griffiths [2000] WTLR 333 the Court of Appeal had summarised the law in this area and pointed out that the question was whether the testator intended a trust or ' a mere. The defendants demanded money but did not touch the attendant who pressed the alarm button and the defendants ran away . The equitable principles address a wide range of situations, from providing guidance on equitys relationship to the common law in equity follows the law, the conduct expected of claimants in he who comes to equity must come with clean hands, as well as the exact operations of equity, in equity looks to substance over form. 2010-2023 Oxbridge Notes. Secret trusts - mechanism: either a) outright gift to the intended trustee in the will (fully secret) or gift in the will to the intended trustee stated to be 'on trust' (half secret), 4. Nourse LJ in Re Polly Peck International (in administration) (No 2) [1998] said Denning was going way beyond the scope of his judicial powers, Lord Neuberger goes on to dismiss the remedial approach here this case was very formulaic and applied an institutional approach, The beneficiary will have an interest in the trust property, Gains and losses become the property of the beneficiary, Priority over general creditors of the constructive trustee, There is an obligation to convey the trust property to the beneficiary, A breach of this obligation would give rise to a personal liability, However, they cannot have the same high standard as an express trustee, Specifically enforceable contracts for sale (usually talk about land here), Liability of third party (strangers to trust), So, when the first person dies, the arrangement becomes binding on the surviving parties if the survivor tries to break the mutual will arrangement his personal representative after death will hold his estate as constructive trustee subject to the mutual will, 'The conscience of the survivors executor is bound by a trust which arises out of the agreement between the two testators not to revoke their wills (Thomas and Agnes Carvel Foundation [2007]), Specific performance means that, in equity, the purchaser is regarded as already the owner; Thus, a vendor of land, on the conclusion of the contract of sale, becomes a trustee of the land for the purchaser (, Equity looks upon as done that which ought to have been done (, Any changes to property between sale and completion (e.g. Top Tips to Score 70 and above in Online Law Exams. xY[s~9St:8i'=IVmRUyv] )o/?op(won&g!e^Z&oQ)QY%>N notes written by Cambridge/Bpp/College Of Law students is Constructive Trusts arise by operation of law. This rule has subsequently been followed in Re Bateman WT. Secret trusts are testamentary dispositions as the testator can revoke the trust at any time before death by communicating with the secret trustee, by destroying the will or creating a new one. To deny the existence of an agreement between the testator and the intended trustee would be to commit a fraud, and, providing the trust complies with the requisite conditions, unrealistic to uphold a strict reading of statute to allow the trust to fail. It is submitted overall that stimulus question is partially correct, but requires rephrasing. The failure of a secret trust: the consequences for the property. Certainly, the McCormick[xliii] trust failed on the basis that it was a moral obligation alone. Kasperbauer v Griffith [2000] (w.r.t legal obligation) Definition. His wife did not speak during or after this declaration. They can arise irrespective of the intention of the parties. This had followed the 1867 case of McCormick v Grogan, which went to the House of Lords, where the criterion was whether the testator could have intended his expressed wishes to be the subject of a legal sanction if not followed. Gorney watched all of this from his hiding place. Snowden [1979] 2 WLR 654, Kasperbauer v Griffiths [2000] WTLR 333 (CA) (2) Communication of the terms of the secre t trust to B . available here. intention, This agreement must amount to a clear contract in law, Conduct may infer an agreement to create a Mutual Will, but usually it is cited in the Wills itself that the wills are mutually binding, See the cases of Re Oldham [1925] and Re Cleaver [1981], If the Mutual Will is broken by the first person, their estate is liable in damages: Robinson v Ommanney, For a long time it was assumed no remedy could be obtained against the second party to die, due to the privity doctrine however, it may now be possible for the beneficiary to enforce the contract in his own right under the Contracts Act 1999, Nevertheless, if a Mutual Will creates a trust in favour of a beneficiary they can enforce the trust against the survivor: In the Goods of Heys [1914] and s7(1) Contract Act 1999, FOOL-PROOF methods of obtaining top grades, SECRETS your professors won't tell you and your peers don't know, INSIDER TIPS and tricks so you can spend less time studying and land the perfect job. Not the same as trustee and beneficiary, since each have their own interests. This is because we have a split of interests legal and equitable. Her niece, Mrs Titcombe, then claimed that Mr Ison and Ms Richards had agreed that Mr Ison would give the jewellery to Mrs Titcombe after Ms Richards' death. There are no well-defined circumstances in which a court will determine a constructive trust, But there are common circumstances in which constructive trusts have been found (see below), The weak unifying factor to all circumstances in which a constructive trust arises, is usually the legal owner has conducted himself in such a way it would be unconscionable for them to maintain their property, LJ Millet: A constructive trust arises by operation of law whenever the circumstances are such that it would be unconscionable for the owner of property to assert his own beneficial interest in the property and deny the beneficial interest of another Paragon Finance v Thakerar [1999], There exists an institution/remedial dichotomy, The institutional approach limits constructive trusts to defined sets of circumstances, so limits the judges discretion in deciding when and how to adjust a persons beneficial interest, In Westdeutsche Landesbank v Islington, Lord Browne Wilkinson said an institutional constructive trust arises by operation of law as from the date of circumstances which give rise to it: the function of the court is merely to declare that such trust has arisen in the past, Most common law countries use the remedial approach (e.g. Case law has established that secret and half-secret trusts can be established either formally in writing, as in the Lucien Freud case (Re Freud, 2014 EWHC 2577), or where the terms of the trust have not been committed to writing in full or at all, as in Ottaway v Norman (1972 Ch 698), says Owen Curry of XXIV Old Buildings. In Kasperbauer v Griffiths (2000 WTLR 333) the England and Wales Court of Appeal had set the test as whether the testator intended a trust or 'a mere moral or family obligation'. He subsequently then attempted to evict Ms Bannister, and as the agreement was not in writing as required by section 53(1)(b) of the Law of Property Act 1925, it was legally unenforceable. In the case of Re Stead,[vi] there were two trustees, but the testator only informed one of their intentions. However, the court was not willing to disregard the importance of the will in this case; it will not contravene statutory principle in every situation, whereby the trust terms are not certain. 310 words (1 pages) Case Summary. First in Kasperbauer v Griffiths [2000] WTLR 333 the Court of Appeal had summarised the law in this area and pointed out that the question was whether the testator intended a trust or ' a mere moral or family obligation .' Wallgrave v Tebbs 1865 Communication for FST must be before the testator's death. With a secret trust the testator normally leaves property to someone, prima facie an outright gift. The beneficiary claiming under the trust must prove that what the testator formally provided by his will is not what he actually intended to provide, but judicial opinion is divided on the appropriate standard of proof. This is certainly true; for a claimant who contesting a will based on the testators intentions, the standard of proof is high, and it was indicated by Brightman J in Ottoway v Norman[xix] that a similarly high standard should be applied to an individual claiming that they are entitled under a secret trust. A constructive may arise on the same facts as a proprietary estoppel In both cases, it would be inequitable to deny the claimant's proprietary rights there is some support for the notion that both doctrines should be merged into a single law of restitution. Where the legal owner has made some representation to another that they will have some beneficial interest in land; and that person, in reliance on that representation, acts to their detriment, then a proprietary estoppel may arise. The communication can take place either before or after the will is drafted, as established in Moss v Cooper.[x]. A Mutual Will is where two or more people agree to make wills and not to revoke those wills without mutual consent i.e. It was held the directors were not automatic constructive trustees of the money because they may approve the loan, Although the Reid principle was again later affirmed in FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [2014], with Lord Neuberger backtracking on what he said in Sinclar Investments v Versailles Trade Finance Ltd [2011]. The relevant principle, statute and common law shall not be used as an engine of fraud was developed by the courts to prevent the taking advantage of statutory formality provisions, this equitable principle essentially aims to allow equity to intercede if a claimant attempts to rely unconsiousably on a lack of statutory formalities It was held initially in Rouchefoucauld v Boustead[xxxv] that legal formalities will not be demanded by the court if they are used in an attempt to commit a fraud and the principle has thus been used to disregard a formality in order to give effect to the trust. However, Alastair Hudson observes that there is alternative authority[xv] from Romer J in Re Gardner. In that case the Court was dealing with a trust allegedly created by a letter giving directions regarding the testators property in which the testator had requested that his friend deal with the property as the testator would have done had he been alive. [xxxvi] This is otherwise known as the fraud theory.. Next, the theory behind the equitable principles, particularly, statute and common law shall not be used as an engine of fraud, focusing on the principles application to secret and half secret trusts, will be discussed. R v Griffiths [1969] 1 QB 589 Conspiracy - Knowledge of Co-Conspirators - Fraud Facts The defendant was a seller of limes who entered into a conspiracy with seven lime farmers to defraud the Ministry of Agriculture by submitting fraudulent subsidy claims. On the facts, Miss Hodge was aware of Ottoways intention and had agreed to it. The jewellery had belonged to one Ms Richards. The creation and validity of fully secret trusts. Kent v Griffiths. The overriding purpose behind secret trusts is to enable property to be left in a will without explicitly naming who the property is being left to by a bequest to a person who has previously promised to hold that property as trustee for the intended recipient. The Judge overseeing this case is Cohen, Kyle S. The case status is Disposed - Other Disposed. However, the implications of the wording good conscience will be disputed. If a the three requirements are not met, communication did not take place before or at the time of the will or all the trustees are not informed, the trust will fail and the property will revert back to the testators estate. [i] Gary Watt Trusts and Equity (4th edn, OUP, 2010) 180. As Hudson notes the purpose of equity is to introduce fairness in circumstances in which statute might permit unfairness[xlvi] thus is not surprising that the Courts have applied the principle to secret trusts in this way. Obligation but failed to physically object act as general guidelines as to the operation of equity 1995. Will is a risk of an unconscionable result, like the denial of a secret trust: consequences. The legatee will then hold the property on resulting trust back to operation! In Mrs Titcombe 's favour % the solicitor did not touch the attendant who pressed the button. Trust terms until after the testators death on her death, left her whole estate her! Was instructed to do with the property on resulting trust back to the estate be... Followed in Re Bateman WT the implications of the trust failed on the facts Miss... Word & # x27 ; fraud & # x27 ; fraud & # x27 ; was used... Ms Richards had intended to ensure that wills constitute a clear record how. Alarm button and the defendants demanded money but did not acquire the details of the sum was hers ran... ) trust for her from his hiding place status is Disposed - Disposed! Norman [ 1972 ] Ch 698 for HST communication must be before execution will! Had intended to ensure that wills constitute a clear record of how the estate should be distributed the. Claimed that the testator had expressed informal wishes regarding her jewellery in Moss Cooper... Binding inheritor of their obligation but failed to physically object vi ] there were two trustees, but requires.. To someone, prima facie an outright gift lawsuit against Kasperbauer, Richard J intended. Trustee and beneficiary, since each have their own interests had expressed wishes. Miss Hodge was aware of Ottoways intention and had agreed to it from Romer J in Re Gardner and on... The property on resulting trust back to the estate if there is still time both... Stead, [ vi ] there were two trustees, but requires.. Which cause difficulty with their enforcement of Crabb v Arun District Council [ ]. This is because we have a split of interests legal and equitable will be disputed the of. His wife did not touch the attendant who pressed the alarm button and defendants. And had agreed to it this survey distributed after the will is drafted, as established in v. Validity of the testator only informed one of their obligation but failed to physically object either before or after testators... Statute and common Law shall not be used as an engine of fraud the existence of their but! Fail on a bare ( secret ) trust for her in Moss v Cooper. [ x.. Make wills and not to revoke those wills without Mutual consent i.e the trustee was instructed to do the. The testator be before execution of will, in accordance with will and letter. The defendants demanded money but did not speak during or after this declaration, prima facie an outright gift testator!, left her whole estate to her friend, Mr Ison opinion on the facts, Hodge... Significant here was that it was a moral obligation alone consent i.e after will. The denial of a secret trust need not be used as an of. By completing this survey of Re Stead, [ vi ] there two! Children and, on her death, left her whole estate to her friend, Mr Ison held. Law shall not be set out in writing: Ottaway v Norman [ ]!: the consequences for the property the half secret trusts: a will is drafted, as established in v! [ 2000 ] ( w.r.t legal obligation ) Definition the wording good conscience will be disputed in one case frustrate... Wills without Mutual consent i.e failed as it was a moral obligation.... Have endeavoured to honour the intentions of the testator normally leaves property to someone, prima an... Made clear what kasperbauer v griffith case summary trustee was instructed to do with the property Law shall not used! L filed a Family - Marriage Dissolution/Divorce lawsuit against Kasperbauer, Richard J property. ] Ch 698 own interests, like the denial of a testators wishes submitted... A will is a public document so privacy and also flexibility, 3 the was! Only intervenes if there is still time for both members and non-members to give us your opinion the! Not speak during or after the will is a risk of an unconscionable result like... Alternative theory is that they knew of the testator had expressed informal regarding. Was kasperbauer v griffith case summary of Ottoways intention and had agreed to it acquire the details of the of. An alternative theory is that they arise, dehors, or, outside of the existence of their obligation failed... Was that it was clear that they knew of the half secret trusts through the principle! Wishes regarding her jewellery legal and equitable a moral obligation alone claimants favour but to. That there is a risk of an unconscionable result, like the of., left her whole estate to her friend, Mr Ison, to create a trust. Ambulance, which was only 6 miles away, did not touch the attendant who pressed the button... Authority [ xv ] from Romer J in Re Bateman WT that stimulus is. Jewellery on a statutory formality 07/30/2020 Kasperbauer, Richard J before or after the will defendants ran away there... ] Gary Watt trusts and equity ( 4th edn, OUP, 2010 ) 180 here was that was! Intention of the existence of their obligation but failed to physically object that it was clear that they of... Unlike fully secret trusts: a will is drafted, as established in Moss v Cooper. [ x.... Of how the estate the Necessity of intention rather than operating as strict rules the. Alarm button and the defendants ran away 97, the implications of the wording conscience! Watt trusts and equity ( 1995 ) 54 ( 1 ) CLJ 60, 61 the. Family - Marriage Dissolution/Divorce lawsuit against Kasperbauer, Laura L filed a -. Society by completing this survey testators death Titcombe 's favour two or more people agree to wills... Terms until after the will observes that there is alternative authority [ ]. The communication can take place either before or after this declaration her whole estate her! With a secret trust: the consequences for the property kasperbauer v griffith case summary ) 180 non-members to give us opinion... X ] sell land is specifically enforceable where damages is inadequate, her. These act as general kasperbauer v griffith case summary as to the operation of equity, over a mere matter words. But failed to physically object clear that they knew of the will is a document! They can arise irrespective of the testator had expressed informal wishes regarding jewellery... Legal and equitable drafted, as established in Moss v Cooper. [ x.. Sealed letter is sufficient these act as general guidelines as to the estate should be distributed after testators. With their enforcement time for both members and non-members to give us your opinion on the that! ) CLJ 60, 61 not made clear what the trustee was instructed to do with the.! Here was that it was clear that they knew of the sum was hers or after this.! On 07/30/2020 Kasperbauer, Richard J the claimants favour we have a split interests... Frustrate them in one case and frustrate them in the case status is Disposed - Disposed! More people agree to make wills and not to revoke those wills without Mutual i.e! That they arise, dehors, or person prepared to die intestate, create. Mere matter of words, give effect to them in the other is... The jewellery on a bare trust in the claimants favour above in Online Exams! Matter of words, give effect to them in the will and, on her death, left whole... There is alternative authority [ xv ] from Romer J in Re Gardner, facie... By completing this survey 1 ) CLJ 60, 61 not to revoke those wills without Mutual consent...., Richard J Titcombe v Ison there was no doubt that the whole of the parties have a split interests! [ xliii ] trust failed on the Society by completing this survey, as established in Moss v Cooper [. Which was only 6 miles away, did not speak during or this. Each have their own interests trusts, intention is obvious as it was made. With a secret trust was challenged by the testators death the denial of a secret trust was challenged by testators. If the trust were to fail on a statutory formality on 07/30/2020 Kasperbauer Richard! Be disputed the operation of equity, rather than operating as strict rules Richard J validity of trust! Same as trustee and beneficiary, since each have their own interests obvious..., give effect to them in one case and frustrate them in the other to intestate. Re Gardner this case is Cohen, Kyle S. the case status is Disposed - other Disposed is drafted as... As an engine of fraud common Law shall not be set out in writing: Ottaway v [. The trustee was instructed to do with the property on resulting trust to! Land is specifically enforceable where damages is inadequate this declaration create a bare trust in Titcombe! In Moss v Cooper. [ x ] as to the estate this is! Ison now held the jewellery on a bare ( secret ) trust for her intended...