Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

The nature of Quistclose trusts : classification and reconciliation.

Glister, J. A. (2004) 'The nature of Quistclose trusts : classification and reconciliation.', Cambridge law journal., 63 (3). pp. 632-655.

Abstract

THE facts of Barclays Bank Ltd. v. Quistclose Investments Ltd. are well-known. In July 1964 Rolls Razor Ltd. declared a dividend payment that they were unable to meet. In order to meet their obligation, the company arranged to borrow the amount of the dividend, £210,000, from Quistclose Investments. The money was duly transferred into a separate account of Rolls Razor, opened specially for the purpose, held at Barclays Bank. The dividend was payable on 24 July but had not been paid when, on 27 August, Rolls Razor entered voluntary liquidation. Barclays and Quistclose both claimed the money. Barclays asserted a right of set-off against the Rolls Razor overdraft, while Quistclose claimed that the money was held in trust for them and, since Barclays were aware of this, the bank were accordingly constructive trustees of the funds.

Item Type:Article
Full text:PDF - Published Version (133Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0008197304006701
Publisher statement:Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2004
Record Created:12 Aug 2008
Last Modified:25 Aug 2011 09:17

Social bookmarking: del.icio.usConnoteaBibSonomyCiteULikeFacebookTwitterExport: EndNote, Zotero | BibTex
Usage statisticsLook up in GoogleScholar | Find in a UK Library