• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/6

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

6 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

Issues

Controversial


Imposed by the court


Is it a good thing that you receive property as the result of a constructive trust

Traditional Definition

A trust imposed by law with no relevance to the intention of the parties

Different between constructive and resulting trusts

Courts and academics disagree


Base level: it appears to reflect a question about where property is coming from. The existence of a prior proprietary base leads the courts to say a constructive trust is not always institutional and may sometimes be remedial (resulting trusts are always institutional).


A resulting trust is declared by law rather than being imposed by law.


In constructive trusts, the courts are recognising the existence of the trust on the date/the curt is brining the trust into existence so doesn't always reflect a proprietary base.

Common intention constructive trusts

Trusts over the family home


Sometimes what is considered are contributions after the purchase.

Westdeutsche Landesbank v Islington LBC

Under an institutional constructive trust, the trust arises by operation of law as from the date of the circumstances which give rise to it: the function of the court is merely to declare that such trust has arisen in the past. The consequences that flow from such trust having arisen (including the possibly unfair consequences to third parties who in the interim have received the trust property) are also determined by rules of law, not under a discretion. A remedial constructive trust, as I understand it, is different. It is a judicial remedy giving rise to an enforceable equitable obligation: the extent to which it operates retrospectively to the prejudice of third parties lies in the discretion of the court.




Beatty v Guggenheim Exploration Co

American case


'A constructive trust is the formulathrough which the conscience of equity finds expression'


But the English position is that creating trusts according to conscience gives judges too much discretion (though arguably this is what is occurring anyway)