LAWS605 Written Assignment

Instructions

1. In this written assignment students will be expected to demonstrate evidence of independent research as well as analytical and evaluative skills.
2. This assignment relates to Module Two (weeks 2- 4) on the topic of creation of a trust. The reading for the whole topic is found at the beginning of the week 2 slides including relevant law relating to gifts.
3. Where applicable, your answer should be supported by relevant case law and relevant statutory provisions such as the Trusts Act 2019 or the Property Law Act 2007. Where the same law may be relevantly applied to different parts of the question the relevant law only needs to be stated once in your answer and does not need to be restated for each further application.
4. Word limit: 1650 words excluding footnotes. Note that footnotes should be for referencing materials and should not contain extraneous materials such as quotes or comments.
5. This assignment is optional and is worth up to 40 percent of your final mark for this paper. Plussage applies. See Canvas for details of how plussage operates.
6. Due Date: Monday 18 May 2026 (this date is extended from the date originally shown in Canvas).
7. All written work should be original and is to be completed independently without collaboration.
8. Written work should be submitted as soft copy through Canvas. Instructions as to how to hand in through Canvas will be given before the due date.
9. Use essay format.
10. Referencing should follow the New Zealand Law Style Guide, 3^rd
11. Plagiarism is a breach of academic integrity and, if found, then disciplinary action may be taken.
12. Please refer to the Law Student Handbook for information on marking criteria, penalties for late submissions and special consideration applications and extensions.

Written Assignment Question

Warren, a successful dentist decides it is time to end his long career and retire. He decides that he will travel around the world for a few years but that first he must put his affairs in order.

Warren owned some shares in an investment company called Fore Guard Investments Limited (Fore Guard).

He asked his sister Roberta if she would agree to hold half of his Fore Guard shares on trust for one of Warren’s three nieces. Roberta agreed and Warren wrote out and signed the necessary paperwork to transfer the shares into Roberta’s name and then handed it to her.

Warren also owned three identical commercial properties in East Auckland situated side by side in Panmure. These were leased to various commercial tenants and brought in a substantial income each year. He told his sister Doris that he wanted her eight years old son Marshall to have one of the properties to ensure his future adding that “it is for Marshall”. He added that the property had recently been valued at 10 million dollars exactly. Warren asked Doris if she would agree to be the trustee for the benefit of Marshall until he reached the age of 30 at which age the property would be transferred to him absolutely? Doris agreed immediately.

Doris and Marshall were both delighted at this fortuitous turn of events. Warren dropped in to see his lawyer Olson on the way home but was told he was away for the day. Warren left a written message for Olson explaining the situation and asking Olson to call him back urgently.

Warren had an acquaintance named Kim, a lawyer, who knew that Warren was putting his affairs in order. Kim, unknown to Warren, was having financial problems and asked Warren if he could be of any help hoping to secure legal work. Warren replied that he wanted to put a commercial property in North Auckland into trust for all his living relatives with income from the properties to be distributed at the discretion of the trustee. Warren asked if Kim would be the trustee. Kim, seeing the answer to his financial problems, responded yes and that he would attend to the paperwork adding that, as a lawyer, “he knew that no deed of trust was necessary and the only thing that Warren needed to do was to transfer the legal ownership of the property and that he would arrange this urgently for Warren”.

Sadly, Warren died unexpectedly in his sleep. At the time of his death:

1. Roberta held the necessary paperwork for the transfer of the shares but had not yet submitted this to Fore Guard for processing.
2. Legal title to all three commercial properties was still in Warren’s name. Olson had drafted all necessary documentation, but this was not signed by Warren.
3. Kim had obtained the necessary signed documentation from Warren and had transferred the ownership of the North Auckland commercial property into his own name at the Land Transfer Office. After Warrens death he advised Warren’s family that, since the trust was not in writing, the effect of the transfer was to gift the North Auckland property to him (Kim) and that he planned to sell the property immediately.

In his will, which is validly executed, Warren appointed Mycroft as his executor and left everything he owed to his wife, Susan.

Required

Advise the executor Mycroft as to whether entitlement to Warren’s property can or cannot be established in respect to Roberta under a valid trust (shares), Doris under a valid trust (commercial property in East Auckland) and Kim under a valid trust (commercial property in North Auckland). If such entitlement cannot be established, then advise as to who would then be able to claim the property.

Consider all aspects of creating a valid trust in your answer.

Do not consider Estoppel.