Garrett v L'Estrange [1911] HCA 67

Garrett v L'Estrange [1911] HCA 67

The agreement or declaration of trust in favour of the wife was void under the Crown Lands Acts as a wife is a person other than the applicant; no sufficient declaration of trust was made, nor was there possession amounting to part performance, and a resulting trust cannot arise against the statute.

Parties
Appellant: Isabella Garrett; Respondent: Guy Stuart L'Estrange (executor of Joseph Garrett, deceased)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 1911
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision on Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conditional Purchase of Crown Land, Trust for Benefit of Spouse, Statute of Frauds, Resulting Trust, Part Performance
Property Law Trusts Statutory Interpretation Conditional Purchase of Crown Land Trust for Benefit of Spouse Statute of Frauds Resulting Trust Part Performance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Isabella Garrett

Appellant

Guy Stuart L'Estrange (executor of Joseph Garrett, deceased)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Decision on Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a husband could take up a conditional purchase of Crown land in trust for his wife under the Crown Lands Act 1884 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether an agreement by the husband to hold land in trust for his wife was invalid under the relevant legislation
  3. 3 Whether a declaration of trust had been made by the husband in favour of the wife

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement or declaration of trust in favour of the wife was void under the Crown Lands Acts as a wife is a person other than the applicant; no sufficient declaration of trust was made, nor was there possession amounting to part performance, and a resulting trust cannot arise against the statute.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with the ordinary consequences.