Rationalising constructive trusts / Ying Khai Liew.
2017
KD1925 .L54 2017 (Map It)
Available at Cellar
Formats
| Format | |
|---|---|
| BibTeX | |
| MARCXML | |
| TextMARC | |
| MARC | |
| DublinCore | |
| EndNote | |
| NLM | |
| RefWorks | |
| RIS |
Items
Details
Author
Title
Rationalising constructive trusts / Ying Khai Liew.
Published
Oxford ; London : Hart Publishing, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc ; Portland, OR : Hart Publishing, 2017.
Call Number
KD1925 .L54 2017
ISBN
9781849465960 hardback alkaline paper
1849465967 hardback alkaline paper
1849465967 hardback alkaline paper
Description
xxxiv, 369 pages ; 25 cm.
System Control No.
(OCoLC)985077554
Bibliography, etc. Note
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Available in Other Form
Online version: Liew, Ying Khai, author. Rationalising constructive trusts Portland, Oregon : Hart Publishing, 2017 9781509917075 (DLC) 2017022549
Record Appears in
Table of Contents
Preface
vii
Acknowledgements
ix
Table of Cases
xxi
Table of Legislation
xxxiii
1.
Introduction
1
1.1.
Aim and Reasons
1
1.2.
Scope and Definition Trusts
2
1.2.1.
Express Trusts
2
1.2.2.
Resulting Trusts
4
1.2.2.1.
Positive Intention
5
1.2.2.1.1.
Declaration of Trust
6
1.2.2.1.2.
Intention to Create a Trust
6
1.2.2.2.
Negative Intention
9
1.2.3.
Constructive Trusts
10
1.3.
Methodology
11
1.4.
Structure of the Book
12
Part A
2.
Building Blocks
15
2.1.
'Qualified Interest' and 'Absolute Interest' Situations
15
2.2.
Primary and Secondary Rights
16
2.3.
Breach, Causation, Remoteness, and Mitigation
17
2.4.
Types of Remedies
18
2.4.1.
Zakrzewski's Scheme
18
2.4.2.
Adopted Scheme
19
2.4.2.1.
Replicative Remedies
20
2.4.2.2.
Reflective Remedies
20
2.4.2.2.1.
Discretion as to Content
22
2.4.2.3.
Transformative Remedies
23
2.4.3.
Doctrine of Precedent
23
3.
Structure of the Law of Constructive Trusts
25
3.1.
Categories of Causative Events: Bilateral, Unilateral, and Court-Based
25
3.2.
Bilateral Events
26
3.2.1.
Non-Contract-Based Subcategory
26
3.2.1.1.
QI Situations
26
3.2.1.2.
AI Situations
27
3.2.2.
Contract-Based Subcategory
29
3.3.
Unilateral Events
30
3.3.1.
AI Situation
30
3.3.2.
QI Situation
31
3.4.
Court-Based Events
31
3.5.
'Non-Core' Doctrines
32
Part B
4.
Doctrine in Rochefoucauld v Boustead
37
4.1.
Nature of the Trust
38
4.1.1.
Express Trust Arguments
39
4.1.1.1.
Literal Argument
39
4.1.1.2.
Disapplication Thesis
40
4.1.1.3.
Definitional Argument
40
4.1.2.
Analysis of Rochefoucauld v Boustead
41
4.1.2.1.
Facts
41
4.1.2.2.
Analysis
42
4.1.2.2.1.
as Settlor?
42
4.1.2.2.2.
Dutch Company as Settlor?
43
4.1.2.2.3.
B as Settlor?
44
4.1.3.
Constructive Trust
46
4.2.
Promise and Reliance
47
4.2.1.
Promise
47
4.2.1.1.
Rejecting the Definitional Argument
49
4.2.2.
Reliance
50
4.2.2.1.
Control
50
4.2.2.2.
Causal Link
51
4.2.3.
Three Difficult Cases
51
4.2.3.1.
Bartlett v Pickersgill
51
4.2.3.2.
Leman v Whitley
52
4.2.3.3.
Lord Irnham v Child
53
4.3.
Rationale
53
4.3.1.
'Perfection Aim'
54
4.3.2.
Correcting Reliance Losses
55
4.3.3.
Conditional Acquisition of Property
57
4.3.4.
QI Situations: Norm Against Taking an Advantage
58
4.4.
'Fraud'
59
4.4.1.
Disapplication Thesis Again
59
4.4.2.
What is 'Fraud'?
60
4.4.2.1.
Not Simply Relying on Section 53(1)(b)
60
4.4.2.2.
Involves a Conveyance
61
4.4.2.3.
Cloaks the True Nature of the Conveyance
61
4.4.2.4.
'Fraud' in Context: A Description
62
4.4.2.5.
Not a Causative Event
62
4.5.
Outer Limits of the Doctrine
63
4.5.1.
Doctrine in Rochefoucauld v Boustead and Resulting Trusts
64
4.5.1.1.
Cases
65
4.5.1.1.1.
'Pure' Constructive Trust Cases
65
4.5.1.1.2.
'Pure' Resulting Trust Cases
66
4.5.1.1.3.
Intersecting Cases
67
4.5.1.2.
Justifying the Constructive Trust Analysis
68
4.5.1.2.1.
Parties' Agreement
68
4.5.1.2.2.
Roles of the Trusts
69
4.5.1.2.3.
Positive and Negative Intention
70
4.5.1.2.4.
Hodgson v Marks
71
4.5.2.
Three-party Cases
72
4.5.2.1.
Concerns
73
4.5.2.1.1.
s 53(1)(b) Concern
73
4.5.2.1.2.
'Fraud' Concern
73
4.5.2.1.3.
Status Quo Concern
74
4.5.2.2.
Rejecting the Concerns
74
4.5.2.2.1.
s 53(1)(b) Concern
74
4.5.2.2.2.
'Fraud' Concern
75
4.5.2.2.3.
Status Quo Concern
76
4.5.2.3.
Case for Third-Party Enforceability
77
5.
Secret Trusts
79
5.1.
Nature of the Trust
79
5.1.1.
Three Requirements
80
5.1.2.
Section 53(1)(b) of the Law of Property Act 1925
82
5.1.2.1.
Section 53(1)(b) Remains Relevant?
83
5.1.2.1.1.
Re Baillie
83
5.1.2.1.2.
Cullen v A-G for Ireland
84
5.1.2.1.3.
North v Loomes
85
5.1.2.2.
Section 53(1)(b) is Disapplied?
87
5.1.3.
Secret Trusts: Inter Vivos Trusts?
88
5.1.3.1.
Re Gardner (No. 2)
89
5.1.3.2.
'Anticipatory' Inter Vivos Trust?
90
5.1.3.3.
B as Settlor?
90
5.1.4.
Further Distinctions
91
5.2.
Rationale
92
5.2.1.
Promise
92
5.2.2.
Reliance
94
5.2.2.1.
A's Reliance, not A's Death
94
5.2.2.2.
Specific Rules
94
6.
Doctrine in Pallant v Morgan
97
6.1.
Discrete Doctrine
98
6.1.1.
Specific Performance?
98
6.1.2.
Proprietary Estoppel?
101
6.1.3.
Agency and Fiduciary Law?
102
6.1.3.1.
Agency Law
102
6.1.3.1.1.
Authority
103
6.1.3.1.2.
Remedy
103
6.1.3.2.
Fiduciary Law
105
6.1.3.2.1.
Authority
105
6.1.3.2.2.
Vulnerability
106
6.1.3.2.3.
Joint Venture
107
6.1.3.2.4.
Acquisition
108
6.1.3.2.5.
Nature of the Remedy
109
6.1.4.
'Common Intention Constructive Trust'?
109
6.2.
Rationale
111
6.2.1.
Promise and Reliance
112
6.2.1.1.
Promise
113
6.2.1.1.1.
Firmness
113
6.2.1.1.2.
Apportionment
114
6.2.1.1.3.
Doctrine in Pallant v Morgan and the Doctrine in Rochefoucauld v Boustead
117
6.2.1.2.
Reliance
118
6.2.1.2.1.
Inducement
118
6.2.1.2.2.
Advantage or Detriment?
120
6.2.1.2.3.
Acquisition-Related Advantage
121
6.2.1.2.4.
Prospective Advantage
122
6.2.1.2.5.
Calculated Opportunity as Advantage
124
6.2.1.2.6.
Timing and Acquisition
125
6.2.1.2.7.
Limits
126
6.2.1.3.
Holiday Inns Inc v Broadhead
126
6.2.1.3.1.
Facts
127
6.2.1.3.2.
Discussion
127
6.3.
Three-Party Cases
130
7.
Proprietary Estoppel
131
7.1.
Nature of the Constructive Trust
131
7.1.1.
Remedies
132
7.1.2.
Causation and Remoteness
134
7.1.3.
Primary Duty
135
7.1.3.1.
Not Preventing Loss
136
7.1.4.
Goal
137
7.1.4.1.
Language of Expectation
138
7.1.4.2.
Availability of Proprietary Remedies
139
7.1.5.
Breach
140
7.1.5.1.
Campbell v Griffin
141
7.1.6.
Detriment-as-Harm
142
7.2.
Objections
144
7.2.1.
Transformative Remedies?
145
7.2.2.
Primary Rights?
145
7.2.2.1.
Not Fault-Based
146
7.2.3.
Not Wrongs-Based?
146
7.2.4.
Hybrid Approach?
148
7.2.5.
Section 116(a) of the Land Registration Act 2002
149
7.2.5.1.
Nature of A's Secondary Right
149
7.2.5.2.
Doctrine of 'Relation Back'
151
7.2.6.
Liability?
152
7.2.6.1.
Assessment
153
7.2.6.1.1.
General Conceptual Problems
154
7.2.6.1.2.
Detriment
155
7.2.6.1.3.
Causation and Remoteness
155
7.2.6.1.4.
Remedial Constructive Trusts
157
7.3.
Rationale
157
7.3.1.
Perfection and Reparation?
158
7.3.2.
AI Situations: Correcting Reliance Losses
158
7.4.
Lessons
160
7.4.1.
Two Senses of 'Constructive Trust'
160
7.4.2.
Pre-Acquisition and Post-Acquisition Agreements
161
7.4.3.
Alternative Causes of Action
163
7.4.3.1.
Extent of Proprietary Estoppel
164
8.
Specifically Enforceable Contracts of Sale and Future Property
167
8.1.
Specifically Enforceable Contracts of Sale
167
8.1.1.
'Trust'?
168
8.1.2.
Requirements
170
8.1.3.
Right and Remedy
173
8.1.4.
Rationale
175
8.2.
Future Property
177
8.2.1.
Requirements
177
8.2.2.
Right and Remedy
178
8.2.3.
Rationale
179
8.3.
Assimilating the Doctrines
179
8.3.1.
Sequence of Events
180
8.3.2.
Formality
182
8.3.3.
Specific Enforceability
184
8.3.4.
Common Analysis
186
9.
Rule in Re Rose
189
9.1.
Requirements
190
9.1.1.
Doing Everything in B's Power
191
9.1.1.1.
Third-Party Discretion
191
9.1.2.
Giving A the Power to Complete the Transfer
193
9.1.3.
Intention to Transfer
194
9.1.3.1.
Features of Intention
194
9.1.3.2.
Ascertaining Intention
196
9.1.4.
Unconscionability?
197
9.1.4.1.
Pennington v Waine
198
9.1.4.2.
Evaluation
198
9.2.
Trust Response
201
9.2.1.
Nature of the Trust
201
9.2.2.
Effects of the Trust
202
9.2.2.1.
Shares
203
9.3.
Rationale
205
9.3.1.
Difficulties with the Present Understanding
205
9.3.2.
Counterpart to Resulting Trusts
207
9.3.2.1.
Resulting Trusts
207
9.3.2.2.
Rule in Re Rose
208
9.3.3.
Consistency and Finality
209
10.
Gains Made In Breach of Fiduciary Duty
213
10.1.
Fiduciary Relationships: Some General Points
214
10.1.1.
Voluntary
215
10.1.2.
Gain-Based, not Loss-Based
216
10.2.
Categorising the Constructive Trust
216
10.2.1.
'Unilateral Events' Category
216
10.2.2.
QI Situation
218
10.2.3.
Primary-Rights or Secondary-Rights Analysis?
218
10.2.3.1.
Not a Primary-Rights Analysis
219
10.2.3.1.1.
Relationship: The 'Agreement' Conception
219
10.2.3.1.2.
Relationship: The 'Attribution' Conception
221
10.2.3.1.3.
Remedy: Lien
222
10.2.3.1.4.
Remedy: Personal Remedies
224
10.2.3.2.
Secondary-Rights Analysis
224
10.3.
Three Questions
225
10.3.1.
Primary Right
225
10.3.2.
Breach, Causation, and Remoteness
226
10.3.2.1.
Breach
226
10.3.2.2.
Causation
227
10.3.2.3.
Remoteness
228
10.3.3.
Discretion
230
10.3.3.1.
Secondary Proprietary Rights?
231
10.3.3.1.1.
Cases
232
10.3.3.1.2.
Effects of the Distinction
234
10.3.3.2.
Precedent
236
10.3.3.2.1.
Effects of the Distinction
236
11.
Remedial Constructive Trusts
239
11.1.
Present Understanding
239
11.1.1.
Definitions
240
11.1.2.
Deficiencies
241
11.1.3.
Senses of 'Remedy'
242
11.2.
Recharacterisation
243
11.2.1.
'Institutional' Constructive Trusts
243
11.2.2.
'Remedial' Constructive Trusts
244
11.2.2.1.
As Reflective Remedies
244
11.2.2.2.
As Transformative Remedies
244
11.2.2.2.1.
Australia
245
11.2.2.2.2.
Canada
246
11.2.2.2.3.
New Zealand
248
11.2.2.2.4.
Singapore
249
11.2.2.2.5.
Malaysia
249
11.3.
Evaluation
250
11.3.1.
Status of English Law
250
11.3.1.1.
Transformative Constructive Trusts: Reflective?
252
11.3.1.2.
Replicative Constructive Trusts: Transformative?
253
11.3.2.
Way Forward
254
Part C
12.
Mutual Wills
259
12.1.
Present Understanding
259
12.1.1.
Distinguishing Features of the Doctrine
260
12.1.2.
Attempted Explanations
260
12.2.
Re-Analysis
262
12.2.1.
B Receives Property from A
262
12.2.1.1.
At A's Death
262
12.2.1.2.
After A's Death
264
12.2.2.
B Does not Receive Property from A
266
12.2.2.1.
Re Dale
267
12.3.
Explaining the Mutual Wills Doctrine
268
12.3.1.
B Receives Property from A
268
12.3.1.1.
Orthodox Explanation
268
12.3.1.2.
Explaining 'Crystallisation'
269
12.3.1.3.
Protecting B
271
12.3.1.4.
Remedies
271
12.3.2.
B Does not Receive Property from A
273
12.3.2.1.
Orthodox Explanation
273
12.3.2.2.
Potential Objections
274
12.4.
Lessons
275
12.4.1.
'Contract at Law'?
276
12.4.2.
Subsuming the QI Situations within the AI Situations?
279
12.4.3.
Secret Trusts as a Fallback?
280
12.4.4.
Abolishing the Mutual Wills Doctrine?
281
12.4.5.
Breadth of the QI Situations
282
13.
Quistclose Doctrine
285
13.1.
Present Understanding
285
13.1.1.
Triggering Events and the Nature of the Trust
287
13.1.2.
Wider Applications
289
13.2.
Re-Analysis
290
13.2.1.
Doctrine in Rochefoucauld v Boustead
290
13.2.2.
Agreement
292
13.2.3.
Nature of the Trust
293
13.2.3.1.
Quistclose Doctrine: Express Trusts
294
13.2.3.2.
Quistclose Doctrine: Constructive Trusts
295
13.3.
Lessons
296
13.3.1.
Income and Capital
297
13.3.2.
Insolvency Context
297
13.3.3.
Role of Intention
298
14.
'Common Intention Constructive Trusts'
301
14.1.
Present Understanding
301
14.2.
Deficiencies
303
14.2.1.
Imputation
303
14.2.1.1.
Acquisition Stage
303
14.2.1.2.
Quantification Stage
305
14.2.1.3.
Attempts to Minimise the Difficulty
306
14.2.2.
Severance
307
14.2.3.
Policy
307
14.3.
CICT as a Reflective Remedy
308
14.3.1.
Elements to be Pleaded and Proved
309
14.3.1.1.
Primary Duty
309
14.3.1.2.
Breach
310
14.3.1.3.
Loss
311
14.3.1.4.
Causation
311
14.3.1.5.
Discretion as to Content
311
14.3.2.
Benefits of the Renewed Approach
312
14.4.
Going Further: The CICT as a Specific Application of Proprietary Estoppel
313
15.
Donatio Mortis Causa
317
15.1.
Requirements
317
15.1.1.
Contemplation of Death
318
15.1.2.
Delivery
319
15.1.2.1.
'Dominion'
319
15.1.2.1.1.
Possession
320
15.1.2.1.2.
Intention to Dispose
321
15.1.2.1.3.
Intention Not to Deal
322
15.1.2.1.4.
Practical Inability to Deal
322
15.1.2.2.
Timing
324
15.1.3.
Conditional upon Death
325
15.2.
Re-Analysis
326
15.2.1.
B Has the Legal Title
327
15.2.1.1.
Orthodox Explanation
327
15.2.1.2.
Nature of the Trust
328
15.2.1.3.
Categorising the Constructive Trust
329
15.2.2.
Has the Legal Title
330
15.2.2.1.
Orthodox Explanation
330
15.2.2.1.1.
Bailment?
331
15.2.2.2.
Nature of the Trust
331
15.2.2.3.
Categorising the Constructive Trust
332
15.2.2.4.
Rationale
332
15.2.3.
Lessons
335
15.2.3.1.
Wills Act
335
15.2.3.2.
DMC and Other Constructive Trust Doctrines
336
16.
Conclusion
337
16.1.
Scope
337
16.1.1.
Personal Liabilities
338
16.1.1.1.
Liability as a 'Constructive Trustee'
338
16.1.1.2.
'Subject To' Cases
339
16.1.2.
Situations Better Analysed as Express or Resulting Trusts
339
16.1.2.1.
Revesting of Title following Rescission
339
16.1.2.2.
Mistaken Payments
340
16.1.2.3.
Tracing-Related Claims
341
16.1.2.4.
Theft
344
16.1.3.
Doubtful Doctrines
345
16.1.3.1.
Forfeiture Rule
345
16.1.3.2.
Breach of Confidence
347
16.2.
Comparing and Contrasting Different Categories
348
16.2.1.
Categories [A] and [B]
348
16.2.1.1.
Causative Events
349
16.2.1.2.
Remedies Beyond Constructive Trusts
351
16.2.2.
Categories [A] and [C]
353
16.2.3.
Categories [A] and [D]
354
16.2.4.
Categories [B] and [E]
355
16.2.5.
Categories [A] and [E]
355
16.2.6.
Categories [B] and [D]
356
16.3.
Historical Context
357
Index
361