Resulting trusts are so called because in them the beneﬁ cial interest ‘results’, that is to say, goes back, to the settlor. They differ from express trusts in that:
(a) they arise from the implied or presumed intention of the settlor and not from his express words;
(b) their creation does not depend upon formalities such as writing; (c) their objects do not need to be immediately identiﬁ able; and (d) a minor may not be an express trustee, but he can be a resulting trustee. 1
In Re Vandervell’s Trusts (No 2) 2 Megarry J drew a distinction, which has since become established, between an ‘automatic’ and a ‘presumed’ resulting trust. In the former, as occurred in Vandervell v IRC , 3 the resulting trust does not depend on any intention on the part of the settlor but is the automatic consequence of the settlor’s failure to dispose of the beneﬁ cial interest in the property. A ‘presumed’ resulting trust, on the other hand, arises in the case of a voluntary conveyance by the settlor of his property to a ‘stranger’, or in the case of a purchase of property in the name of a stranger, where it can be presumed that the settlor intended the beneﬁ cial interest to reside in himself.