Lucy's Property Case Study

1431 Words3 Pages

The aim of this essay is to advise Matthew, Naomi and Oscar, they have all raised questions about the properties Lucy has intended for them. This essay will confirm if each of them can claim entitlement to Lucy’s property. A gift is a present voluntary transfer of property by one person to another without any consideration or compensation. It is evident in the facts that Lucy had intended an absolute gift to Matthew as she set no consideration requirements, in addition to this, the gift also occurred inter vivos as it was during Lucy’s lifetime. There are 3 requirements for the creation of a valid gift; Intention, delivery and acceptance. The donor must Intend the property to be transferred as a gift to the donee. Courts are often suspicious …show more content…

Some remain in galleries, one remains in the workshop. The issue is that he had not been delivered all the paintings. Turner LJ identified transferring the legal title of the property to the donee was one of the 3 principal ways to give a gift, he stated that the donor must do everything which according to the nature of the property comprised in the settlement thus, indicating the donor must deliver the possession of the paintings, this is also supported by Re Cole. The delivery element could be satisfied with a symbolic delivery, in Lock v Heath delivery of one chair was sufficient to be a gift of the whole set of furniture. Clearly due to Lucy sending the 3 paintings she delivered the title for the paintings to Matthew, this is a symbolic delivery as it difficult to transport all paintings at once due to multiple parties who are at different locations plus they cannot risk damage to the valuable paintings. A bailment is the relationship established when someone entrusts his property temporarily to someone else without intending to give up title, Lucy had this relationship with the galleries and relationship will transfer to Matthew. Regarding the painting in the will, wills are ambulatory, Lucy could have delivered the painting to Matthew during her lifetime despite her will it states it is intended to a different individual, if this is the case Matthew can claim the painting in the will. If she did not deliver the painting to Matthew equity will not perfect a gift if the donor changed her mind. Lastly, Matthew has shown no form of rejection, subsequently he had accepted the

Open Document