Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

The Nature of Quistclose Trusts: Classification and Reconciliation

Glister, J.A.

The Nature of Quistclose Trusts: Classification and Reconciliation Thumbnail


Authors

J.A. Glister



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.

Citation

Glister, J. (2004). The Nature of Quistclose Trusts: Classification and Reconciliation. Cambridge Law Journal, 63(3), 632-655. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008197304006701

Journal Article Type Article
Publication Date Nov 1, 2004
Deposit Date Aug 12, 2008
Publicly Available Date Aug 12, 2008
Journal Cambridge Law Journal
Print ISSN 0008-1973
Electronic ISSN 1469-2139
Publisher Cambridge University Press
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 63
Issue 3
Pages 632-655
DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008197304006701

Files

Published Journal Article (136 Kb)
PDF

Copyright Statement
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2004




You might also like



Downloadable Citations