Hunter v Moss [1994] 1 WLR 452 (CA)

Facts

  • Mr. Moss, the defendant, owned 950 shares in a private company.
  • He declared he would hold 50 of those shares on trust for Mr. Hunter, the plaintiff.
  • No specific shares were identified as constituting the trust property.
  • This raised questions about whether the trust satisfied the certainty of subject matter requirement.

Issues

  1. Whether a valid trust can arise over a portion of identical intangible assets (such as shares) without specific identification of those assets.
  2. Whether the "certainty of subject matter" rule requires precise allocation for such property.
  3. Whether the distinction between physical assets and intangible, fungible assets affects the requirement for identification in trust creation.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal held that the trust was valid despite the absence of identification of particular shares.
  • The distinction between physical and intangible assets was emphasized; all ordinary shares in a company are identical and interchangeable.
  • The court confirmed that for identical intangible property, specifying a portion (e.g., 50 out of 950 shares) is sufficient to satisfy the certainty requirement.
  • The reasoning was contrasted with cases involving physical assets (e.g., wine bottles), for which segregation is required.

Legal Principles

  • Certainty of subject matter is essential for a valid trust but may be satisfied in relation to fungible, intangible assets without precise identification.
  • For identical shares held within one company, it is unnecessary to allocate specific shares for a trust to be valid.
  • The principle does not apply to physical assets or to non-identical assets, where segregation and clear identification remain necessary.
  • Later case law confirmed that the rule in Hunter v Moss applies solely to identical, non-physical assets.

Conclusion

Hunter v Moss established an exception to the certainty of subject matter requirement for trusts over identical intangible assets, such as shares, allowing trusts to be created without allocating specific units, provided the assets are truly fungible and indistinguishable. The ruling does not extend to physical or non-identical property.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal