The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts

The aim of this paper is to illustrate Denis Ong’s facility for identifying the hard questions of trusts law with reference to his analysis, in Trusts Law in Australia, of a settlor’s intention to create a trust. As we will see, this is not a simple matter of ascertaining, from writing or other evid...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Michael Bryan I
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Bond University 2022-11-01
Series:Bond Law Review
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.55616
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850060165823332352
author Michael Bryan I
author_facet Michael Bryan I
author_sort Michael Bryan I
collection DOAJ
description The aim of this paper is to illustrate Denis Ong’s facility for identifying the hard questions of trusts law with reference to his analysis, in Trusts Law in Australia, of a settlor’s intention to create a trust. As we will see, this is not a simple matter of ascertaining, from writing or other evidence, that an intention to create a trust has been manifested. A court may have to go further in some cases and consider whether the settlor possessed a genuine intention to create a trust, or whether the intention is, in some sense, counterfeit. This may be because the putative trust is a sham. Even if it is not a sham, there may be other reasons why the arrangement put in place by a settlor cannot be characterised as a trust. Recent decisions, considered later in this paper, have highlighted the distinction between true and counterfeit intention.
format Article
id doaj-art-bf2ee227fa56478e9be65f7b08e37594
institution DOAJ
issn 1033-4505
2202-4824
language English
publishDate 2022-11-01
publisher Bond University
record_format Article
series Bond Law Review
spelling doaj-art-bf2ee227fa56478e9be65f7b08e375942025-08-20T02:50:40ZengBond UniversityBond Law Review1033-45052202-48242022-11-0134310.53300/001c.55616The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating TrustsMichael Bryan IThe aim of this paper is to illustrate Denis Ong’s facility for identifying the hard questions of trusts law with reference to his analysis, in Trusts Law in Australia, of a settlor’s intention to create a trust. As we will see, this is not a simple matter of ascertaining, from writing or other evidence, that an intention to create a trust has been manifested. A court may have to go further in some cases and consider whether the settlor possessed a genuine intention to create a trust, or whether the intention is, in some sense, counterfeit. This may be because the putative trust is a sham. Even if it is not a sham, there may be other reasons why the arrangement put in place by a settlor cannot be characterised as a trust. Recent decisions, considered later in this paper, have highlighted the distinction between true and counterfeit intention.https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.55616
spellingShingle Michael Bryan I
The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts
Bond Law Review
title The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts
title_full The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts
title_fullStr The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts
title_full_unstemmed The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts
title_short The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts
title_sort role of true and counterfeit intentions in creating trusts
url https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.55616
work_keys_str_mv AT michaelbryani theroleoftrueandcounterfeitintentionsincreatingtrusts
AT michaelbryani roleoftrueandcounterfeitintentionsincreatingtrusts