Quistclose Trusts: was Lord Wilberforce right after all?

Abstract

The trust arrangement found by Lord Wilberforce in Barclays Bank v Quistclose Investments has been the subject of a fierce debate seeking to explain its precise nature and reconcile it with established principles. It is argued that six of the principal explanations discussed in this debate have been exposed as deficient, either as inconsistent with orthodoxy or as requiring an unrealistic construction of the facts. It is further argued that the explanation originally given by Lord Wilberforce has been missed, and that this explanation avoids both of these problems.