Cycle 7 essays

A visually engaging illustration depicting the concepts of constructive trusts, emphasizing dual ownership, legal complexities, and the balance of contributions in property disputes.

Understanding Constructive Trusts Quiz

Test your knowledge on the intricate concept of constructive trusts, particularly focusing on common intention and the nuances of joint and sole legal ownership.

Evaluate the stages of constructive trusts.
Explore the role of detrimental reliance.
Analyze critical case law and theories.

14 Questions4 MinutesCreated by ExaminingTrusts101

Two stages of common intention constructive trusts

- Establishing the constructive trust

- Quantifying the beneficial interests

Sole legal owner when establishing =

Had a genuine (express, or inferred only on grounds of contribution to purchase) common intention that other party should have a share in the property - ROSSET

Joint legal owner when establishing =

You can infer from the whole course of conduct (that they should get more than 50%) - STACK ; JONES

When establishing, detrimental reliance is required for both sole and joint ownership

Beef about joint legal ownership establishing 'whole course of conduct' ?

Some sole legal cases have used the ‘whole course of conduct’ but haven’t overruled rosset yet = us confused (GEARY ; ASPDEN) BUT CAN BE ARGUED ITS MORE FLEXIBLE

What does MEE say on Rossett about establishing?

Rossett relies too much on half remembered conversations and doesn’t acknowledge non-financial contributions

The whole course of conduct approach is still uncertain because like how do you know what shows what.

What is the confusion around detrimental reliance?

Stack and Jones don’t really mention it which questions whether its really a requirement or is it just so obvious that it doesn’t need acknowledging

Inference and imputation used interchangeably --> how were the judges split in jones?

2 imputed and 2 inferred

What did the 2 inferring judges in jones say?

Noted that the difference in practice is negligible/non existent.

Why are we disregarding the use of imputation in establishing but using it in quantifying?

MEE'S ISSUES WITH IMPUTATION:

Said JONES imputed the intention based on the fact that he never used his interest/property

But ROSSET was like intention as to use is not the same as intention as to interest (because he didn’t use it doesn’t mean he didn’t want it)

Says imputation doesn’t reflect peoples actual intentions

Collins confusing point on courts inferring

Says court never infer unfair intentions, even though unfair intentions exist

Gardener on quantifying :

Criticises the range of factors used to quantify

Shat on lady hale, where she argued love and affection was relevant in STACK

BASICALLY says like how the fuck can we quantify the unquantifiable.

Cycle 7 essays

Understanding Constructive Trusts Quiz

More Quizzes