How Did Knight Set Out Three Requirements For A Valid Trust?

Problem Question
i. Knight v Knight set out three requirements for a valid trust. To satisfy the first requirement, certainty of intention, James must have made it clear that he intended for it to be made a trust, rather than a gift, as shown in Jones v Lock. The words used in this instance, that Kath is mentioned as a trustee and that has absolute discretion when distributing the money, can be said to afford a clear intention to create a trust.
To satisfy the second requirement, certainty of subject, it is broken into two limbs: it has to be clearly identified as being trust property and it must be clear as to how much property is to be passed on to a beneficiary.
The first limb requires that, the trust property be defined in objective
This is because although, it may have fulfilled the certainty requirements, it would be considered administratively unworkable, as seen in West Yorkshire, where a trust was set up for 2.5 million inhabitants. Therefore, as James gave the residue of his estate to the University of Fulford, the £250,000 that was meant to be split between his mates, and the people of England and Wensleydale would instead go to Fulford
Nevertheless, there is still the possibility that the trust could fall under the rule laid out in Re Recher’s Will Trusts. If there are no words which appear to impose a trust then the gift will instead take affect for the benefit of the existing members and will be treated as adding towards their funds. As such, the funds which are the subject matter of the contract that the existing members have formed between themselves, will therefore be dealt with in exactly the same way as the funds that the members have subscribed to, in doing so it is important to note that this is not an immediate