Monday, June 17, 2019
Resulting and Constructive Trust in Equity & Trust Case Study
Resulting and Constructive Trust in Equity & Trust -  example Study ExampleShe  as well, throughout the relationship, looked after the children and performed all the usual domestic duties around the home.In Sept 2003, Lynn formed a liaison with another  earthly concern and moved out of the house. She brought an action against Mike claiming that she was entitled to a half-share in the house by reason of her contributions to the house hold expenses during the period the parties lived together. According to the  designate at the trial in the High Court, both Lynn and Mike had assumed that the house was jointly owned although the matter was never actually discussed  mingled with them. It is also not in dispute that, if it had not been for the fact that Lynn was working part-time, Mike would not have been able to meet the mortgage payments out of his own salary.1) Applying Lloyds  brim plc v Rosset (1994) 1 A.C. 107, (HL), in the absence of any finding of an agreement, arrangement or unde   rstanding between the parties to share beneficially, Lynns indirect contributions to household expenses were insufficient to  free-base a beneficial interest in the house. In particular, the  appeal refused to follow the decision of Mr. Nicholas Mostyn Q.C. (sitting as a deputy High judge) in Le v Le Foe (2002) 2 F.L.R. 970on the ground that it was inconsistent with Lord Bridges speech in Rosset2) Distinguishing Midlands Bank Plc v Cooke (1995) 4 All E.R. 562 (C.A.), it was not open to the court to assess Gladys beneficial share in the house by undertaking a survey of the whole course of dealings between the parties relevant to their  self-will and occupation of the  office. The principle enunciated in Cooke applied only to the establishment of an equitable interest through direct contributions.In December 2004, the Court of Appeal  ignore Lynns appeal affirming both grounds given by the High Court.TaskLynn now wishes to appeal to the House of Lords against the Court of Appeals deci   sion and seeks your written opinion on the merits of her claim. You should support your advice by reference to decided cases. AnswerThe current state of caselaw on implied  combining and beneficial or equitable interest in property due to indirect contributions to family home is not favourable to the appeal being considered by Lynn Jones. English courts are reluctant to adopt the remedial constructive trust principles of Canadian courts.It seems to be that judicial reasoning on implied trust rely on contributions to the purchase price and provable agreement, arrangement or understanding between the parties to share the property beneficially prevent the application of principles of justice and conscience in the present case. The facts of the problem show that the court had already struck  gobble up Lynn Jones arguments on the application of resulting trust principles because of the lack of contribution to the purchase price or proof of agreement, arrangement or understanding to share    equitable interest.  non only the Rosset and Cooke cases but also the basic direction of   
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.