Apr. 3, 4.(c) Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England & Wales. [n.d.]. Re Rose [1952] Ch 499, *499 In Re Rose. <https://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&suppsrguid=i0ad69f8e000001648408161f5dd6478e&docguid=I8F996330E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&hitguid=I8F993C20E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&rank=15&spos=15&epos=15&td=18&crumb-action=append&context=24&resolvein=true>
Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Vaughan [1992] 4 All ER 22. [n.d.]. <https://plus.lexis.com/api/document/collection/uk/id/4CSP-49F0-TWP1-60B5-00000-00?context=1001073&federationidp=P48HCM59638>
Bishopgate Investment Management Ltd v Homan [1995] 1 All ER 347. [n.d.]. <https://plus.lexis.com/api/document/collection/uk/id/4CSP-4J90-TWP1-60R5-00000-00?context=1001073&federationidp=P48HCM59638>
Boardman v Phipps [1967] 2 AC 46. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/f7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2uZn0itmSiIs1jxAZrwAJrxAV5wsKjIoW0ha>
Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769. [n.d.]. <https://plus.lexis.com/api/document/collection/uk/id/4CSP-4J80-TWP1-601G-00000-00?context=1001073&federationidp=P48HCM59638>
‘Charities Act 2011’. [n.d.]. <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/25/contents/enacted>
Craig Rotherham. 2004. ‘The Property Rights of Unmarried Cohabitees: The Case for Reform’, Conveyancer and Property Lawyer: 268–92 <https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IA73757D0E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true>
Crown copyright. [n.d.]. Curtis v Pulbrook [2011] EWHC 167 (Ch), Richard Anthony Curtis, Judith Anne Ambler, Susan Edlizbeth Broker (the Personal Representatives of Arthur Ronald Towns, Deceased) v Richard Henry Pulbrook, Anucha Pulbrook, Alice Pulbrook <https://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&suppsrguid=i0ad6ada700000164840a83bcfb0e859c&docguid=IB45F3170363C11E09562B961F78E26BE&hitguid=I2225BC2030BF11E080B7E3968EE9A6A3&rank=1&spos=1&epos=1&td=3&crumb-action=append&context=50&resolvein=true>
‘Developing the Obligation Characteristic of the Trust’. 2001a. Law Quarterly Review, 117 <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&srguid=ia744c0970000014d7c0c50008d93177f&docguid=ICCAEDD80E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028&hitguid=ICCAEDD80E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028&rank=1&spos=1&epos=1&td=1&crumb-action=append&context=8&resolvein=true>
‘———’. 2001b. Law Quarterly Review, 117 <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&srguid=ia744c0970000014d7c0c50008d93177f&docguid=ICCAEDD80E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028&hitguid=ICCAEDD80E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028&rank=1&spos=1&epos=1&td=1&crumb-action=append&context=8&resolvein=true>
‘Discretionary Trusts and Powers of Appointment: Progressive Assimilation’. 1992. The Canterbury Law Review ([Christchurch, N.Z: Faculty of Law of the University of Canterbury) <https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/handle/10092/3253>
Emery, C.T. 1982. ‘The Most Hallowed Principle: Certainty of Beneficiaries of Trusts and Powers of Appointment’, The Law Quarterly Review, 98 (London: Stevens and Sons) <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=9e42ab19-4e99-e711-80cb-005056af4099>
‘Explaining the Trust’. 2015. The Law Quarterly Review (London: Stevens and Sons)
Feb. 12, 13, 14, 15; March 29(c) Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England & Wales. [n.d.]. Lloyds Bank Ltd v Rosset [1991] AC 107, *107 Lloyds Bank Plc. Appellants v Rosset and Another Respondents <https://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&suppsrguid=i0ad69f8e000001685be02319fb1ea9e0&docguid=IE21B2C20E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&hitguid=IE21B0510E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&rank=1&spos=1&epos=1&td=2&crumb-action=append&context=145&resolvein=true>
Feb. 20.1941 Nov. 14, 17, 18, 20, 21, 24.(c) Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England & Wales. [n.d.]. Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1942] 1 All ER 378, *134 Regal (Hastings) Ltd. v Gulliver and Others <https://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&suppsrguid=i0ad62903000001685c23b2651cbe6fc9&docguid=I853552A0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&hitguid=I85352B90E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&rank=1&spos=1&epos=1&td=1&crumb-action=append&context=17&resolvein=true>
FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [2014] UKSC 45, [2014] 3 WLR 535. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/e7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIoXadn2mdo1KdlIOuDYL2CKL2y0L2BULezIOdm9baa>
Foskett v McKeown [1997] 3 All ER 392 (CA). [n.d.]. <https://plus.lexis.com/api/document/collection/uk/id/4CSP-4J80-TWP1-60JM-00000-00?context=1001073&federationidp=P48HCM59638>
Foskett v McKeown [2001] 1 AC 102 (HL). [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/d7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo3GJn2WIikvNCPnhzPngDP9MBjrMi6atF/foskett-v-mckeown>
Gardner, Simon. 2011a. An Introduction to the Law of Trusts, 3rd ed (New York: Oxford University Press) <https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/nottingham/detail.action?docID=845987>
———. 2011b. An Introduction to the Law of Trusts, 3rd ed (New York: Oxford University Press)
———. 2011c. An Introduction to the Law of Trusts, 3rd ed (New York: Oxford University Press)
———. 2011d. An Introduction to the Law of Trusts, 3rd ed (New York: Oxford University Press)
Gravells, Nigel P. 1977. ‘Public Purpose Trusts’, Modern Law Review, 40 <http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/modlr40&div=40&collection=journals&set_as_cursor=0&men_tab>
Green, B. 1984. ‘Grey, Oughtred and Vandervell - A Contextual Reappraisal’, Modern Law Review <http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/modlr47&id=405>
Hayton, David. 1995. ‘Chapter 1, Equity’s Identification Rules’, in Laundering and Tracing (Oxford: Clarendon Press), pp. 1–21 <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=730137f3-f691-e611-80c7-005056af4099>
Hodge, David. 1980. ‘Secret Trusts: The Fraud Theory Revisited’, The Conveyancer and Property Lawyer, 44.1 (London: Sweet and Maxwell): 341–50 <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=55e0443c-9aa3-e711-80cb-005056af4099>
John Mee. 2012. ‘Jones v Kernott: Inferring and Imputing in Essex’, Conveyancer and Property Lawyer: 167–80 <https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/I16D6DF4187B011E1BF2ED535FDE7B006/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true>
Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/d7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2GdnZuto0WIikvNCPnhzPngDP9MBjrMi6atF>
March 21, 22, 23; June 14(c) Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England & Wales. [n.d.]. Bank of Credit and Commerce International V Akindele [2001] Ch 437, *437 Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd and Another v Akindele <https://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&suppsrguid=i0ad6ada7000001685c2b9675e60a8ad6&docguid=I6EBA6DE0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&hitguid=I6EBA46D0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&rank=7&spos=7&epos=7&td=8&crumb-action=append&context=51&resolvein=true>
Marr (Appellant) v Collie (Respondent) (Bahamas). [n.d.]. <http://www.justcite.com/Document/e7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIoXeJmZGdo2qdlIOuDYL2CKL2y0L2BULezIOdm9baa/marr-appellant-v-collie-respondent-bahamas>
Martin Dixon. 2012. ‘Editor’s Notebook: The Still Not Ended, Never-Ending Story’, Conveyancer and Property Lawyer: 83–86 <https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/I16D57FB087B011E1BF2ED535FDE7B006/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true>
Martin George*. 2017. ‘Presuming Too Little about Resulting and Constructive Trusts? Marr v Collie [2017] UKPC 17’, The Conveyancer and Property Lawyer: 303–12 <https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IC23552707E7411E7AA22E07DFD66C964/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true>
Mascall v Mascall (1985) 50 P. & C.R. 119. [n.d.]. *119 Mascall v Mascall <https://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&suppsrguid=i0ad69f8e000001648409510b5dd64796&docguid=IEF8836F0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&hitguid=IEF880FE0E42711DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&rank=1&spos=1&epos=1&td=14&crumb-action=append&context=36&resolvein=true>
McPhail v Doulton [1971] AC 424. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/f7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2utn1aZnSiIs1jxAZrwAJrxAV5wsKjIoW0ha>
Murad v Al-Saraj [2005] EWCA Civ 959. [n.d.]. Murad v Al-Saraj <https://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?&suppsrguid=i0ad6ada7000001685c255a59b922c4e7&docguid=I096CC900E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&hitguid=I096CA1F0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9&rank=2&spos=2&epos=2&td=3&crumb-action=append&context=25&resolvein=true>
Nelson v Greening & Sykes [2007] EWCA Civ 1358. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/d7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIoZeJnXeJmZWIikvNCPnhzPngDP9MBjrMi6atF>
Nicholls, Lord. 1998. ‘Chapter 15, Knowing Receipt: The Need for a New Landmark, from: Restitution : Past, Present and Future : Essays in Honour of Gareth Jones’, in Restitution: Past, Present and Future : Essays in Honour of Gareth Jones (Oxford: Hart), pp. 231–46 <http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/nottingham/detail.action?docID=1772785>
Parkinson, Patrick. 2002. ‘Reconceptualising the Express Trust’, Cambridge Law Journal, 61.3 <https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0008197302001769>
Pearce, Robert A., and Warren Barr. 2018a. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018b. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018c. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018d. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018e. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018f. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018g. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018h. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018i. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018j. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018k. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2018l. Pearce & Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 7th ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
Penner, J. E., and Jeremiah Lau. 2019a. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019b. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019c. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019d. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019e. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019f. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019g. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019h. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019i. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019j. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
———. 2019k. The Law of Trusts, Eleventh edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
Pennington v Waine [2002] 1 WLR 2075. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/f7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2qdn0itnSiIs1jxAZrwAJrxAV5wsKjIoW0ha>
Re Baden (No 2) [1973] 1 Ch 9. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/f7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2udnZqJmSiIs1jxAZrwAJrxAV5wsKjIoW0ha/badens-deed-trusts-no-2-in-re>
Re Denley’s Trust Deed [1969] 1 Ch 373. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/f7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2ydo2adnSiIs1jxAZrwAJrxAV5wsKjIoW0ha>
Re Lipinski [1976] Ch 235. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/f7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2uJm4utmSiIs1jxAZrwAJrxAV5wsKjIoW0ha>
Re Vandervell (No 2) [1967] 2 AC 291. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/d7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo4ytm3Cdm3WIikvNCPnhzPngDP9MBjrMi6atF/vandervell-v-commissioners-of-inland-revenue>
‘Reconceptualising the Express Trust’. 2002. Cambridge Law Journal, 61.3 <https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197302001769>
Roche, Juanita. 2017. ‘RETURNING TO CLARITY AND PRINCIPLE: THE PRIVY COUNCIL ON STACK v DOWDEN’, The Cambridge Law Journal, 76.3: 493–96 <https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197317000769>
Rotherham, Craig. 2000. ‘Chapter 6, Tracing and Justice in Bankruptcy’, in Restitution and Insolvency (London: Mansfield Press), pp. 113–33 <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=4e6a61b4-ec1d-e611-80bd-0cc47a6bddeb>
Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan [1995] 2 AC 378. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/e7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIoXitn1qdlIOuDYL2CKL2y0L2BULezIOdm9baa>
‘Sharing Homes | Law Commission’. [n.d.]. <https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/sharing-homes/#sharing-homes>
SIMON GARDNER.*. 1993. ‘Rethinking Family Property’, Law Quarterly Review: 263–300 <https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/ICD0DED70E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true>
———. 1996. ‘Knowing Assistance and Knowing Receipt: Taking Stock’, Law Quarterly Review: 56–94 <https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/ICCE41E51E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028/View/FullText.html?skipAnonymous=true>
Smith, Lionel D. 1995. ‘Tracing into the Payment of a Debt’, The Cambridge Law Journal, 54.02 <https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197300083677>
Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17, [2007] 2 AC 432. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/f7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2mZn0itnSiIs1jxAZrwAJrxAV5wsKjIoW0ha/stack-v-dowden>
Target Holdings v Redferns [1996] AC 421. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/d7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo5qJn0GdnZWIikvNCPnhzPngDP9MBjrMi6atF/target-holdings-ltd-v-redferns-hl>
The Federal Republic of Brazil and Another (Respondents) v Durant International Corporation and Another (Appellants) (Jersey). [n.d.]. <http://www.justcite.com/Document/e7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIoXaJn1GJnZadlIOuDYL2CKL2y0L2BULezIOdm9baa/the-federal-republic-of-brazil-and-another-respondents-v-durant>
Thomas, S. B. 2001. ‘“Goodbye” Knowing Receipt. “Hello” Unconscientious Receipt’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 21.2: 239–65 <https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/21.2.239>
Vandervell v IRC [1967] 2 AC 291. [n.d.]. <https://www.justcite.com/Document/f7jsrUrxA0LxsKjIo2uJn5KJnSiIs1jxAZrwAJrxAV5wsKjIoW0ha>
