Explaining the Trust in Rochefoucauld v Boustead

Abstract

In Rochefoucauld v Boustead, the Court of Appeal enforced a trust of land despite an absence of written evidence to satisfy s 7 of the Statute of Frauds. The case has attracted intense academic attention, not because this precise point arises often for decision, but rather as part of wider attempt by academics to explain and rationalise the recent growth of constructive trusts. Some scholars claim Rochefoucauld v Boustead as a constructive trust to draw from it a wide principle under which other wayward and orphan constructive trusts might be sheltered. Others argue that Rochefoucauld v Boustead concerned an express trust. This article argues that Rochefoucauld v Boustead is properly understood as an express trust. It will consider the nature of the fraud, the way in which the Statute of Frauds and the fraud must be pleaded, the arguments against a constructive trust and the detailed facts of Rochefoucauld v Boustead as it was pleaded and argued.