65553
Description
Mind Map by costafortune, updated more than 1 year ago
|
Created by costafortune
over 11 years ago
|
|
CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS
- Arise by operation of law,
irrespective of parties express or
presumed intentions
- Court decides when property
should be held for benefit of
someone whom equity and
good conscience demand it to
be held for!
- HUSSEY V PALMER
Paid money, moved
into SIL's house,
extension not built
- CT imposed wherever
justice and good
conscience require it!
- CT imposed wherever
justice and good
conscience require it!
- Court decides when property
should be held for benefit of
someone whom equity and
good conscience demand it to
be held for!
- No formal written requirements excluded
from s53(1)(b) & (c) does not have to be
evidenced in writing
- PROFITS BY PERSON IN FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIP
- BRAY v FORD
- Person as a FR is not allowed or
entitled to make a profit unless
expressly provided for
- Cannot put himself in position where
interests and duty conflict
- TITO v WARDELL
- Tree analogy While fruit is on
the tree, have a FR, once fruit
on ground FR is gone.
- Tree analogy While fruit is on
the tree, have a FR, once fruit
on ground FR is gone.
- TITO v WARDELL
- Cannot put himself in position where
interests and duty conflict
- Person as a FR is not allowed or
entitled to make a profit unless
expressly provided for
- READING v AG - FR exists when
one person entrusts another with a
job to perform
- Sergeant helping to move contraband
- He'd been entrusted to
perform a job, the
contraband was not part of
that job, bribe money
recovered
- He'd been entrusted to
perform a job, the
contraband was not part of
that job, bribe money
recovered
- Sergeant helping to move contraband
- FID liable in 3 circumstances
- 1) receiving remuneration
to which he is not entitled
- ie making unauthorised
payments to himself -
SUGDEN v CROSSLAND
£75 inducement to retire
- 2) Entering into transaction
on own behalf instead of
principals
- KEECH v SANDFORD - market lease for
minor, trustee could not keep lease for
himself.
- C/F RE BISS
Widow applying
for lease, refused
so son took it on,
could keep as
not a trustee, no
FR just one of the
next of kin
- 3) Using confidential
information for own ends
- KEECH v SANDFORD
takeover assisted by
confidential information
gained whilst working for the
trust
- IDC v COOLEY C was MD,
left job saying ill but really to
perform other contract, had to
pay back money
- C/F QUEENSLAND MINES v
HUDSON QM interested in mining
operation. H obtained the licences
for QM to do job
- QM couldn't afford to proceed, H
resigned as MD& with QM's
knowledge undertook the work.
Did not have to pay the profit back.
- BRIBES
- LISTER & CO v STUBBS
- AC held that when
fiduciary accepts a
bribe, not held as CT
- Overturned in AG of HK v REID public
prosecutor taking bribes, bought property in
NZ with money. Right in rem imposed could claim all the property
- followed in CROWN RESOURCES AG v VINOGRADSKY
- BUT - SINCLAIR INVESTMENTS UK v VERSAILLES TRADE
FINANCE said that AC should follow own decisions unless 'per
incuriam or of doubtful reliability
- Beneficiary cannot claim
proprietary relief unless:
- Asset or money was or
had been beneficially
property of beneficiary
- OR, trustee had acquired the asset by
taking advantage of opportunity or right
which was the beneficiaries
- So, personally liable in equity but no proprietary interest!!
- So, personally liable in equity but no proprietary interest!!
- OR, trustee had acquired the asset by
taking advantage of opportunity or right
which was the beneficiaries
- Asset or money was or
had been beneficially
property of beneficiary
- Beneficiary cannot claim
proprietary relief unless:
- BUT - SINCLAIR INVESTMENTS UK v VERSAILLES TRADE
FINANCE said that AC should follow own decisions unless 'per
incuriam or of doubtful reliability
- followed in CROWN RESOURCES AG v VINOGRADSKY
- Overturned in AG of HK v REID public
prosecutor taking bribes, bought property in
NZ with money. Right in rem imposed could claim all the property
- AC held that when
fiduciary accepts a
bribe, not held as CT
- LISTER & CO v STUBBS
- BRIBES
- QM couldn't afford to proceed, H
resigned as MD& with QM's
knowledge undertook the work.
Did not have to pay the profit back.
- C/F QUEENSLAND MINES v
HUDSON QM interested in mining
operation. H obtained the licences
for QM to do job
- IDC v COOLEY C was MD,
left job saying ill but really to
perform other contract, had to
pay back money
- KEECH v SANDFORD
takeover assisted by
confidential information
gained whilst working for the
trust
- C/F RE BISS
Widow applying
for lease, refused
so son took it on,
could keep as
not a trustee, no
FR just one of the
next of kin
- KEECH v SANDFORD - market lease for
minor, trustee could not keep lease for
himself.
- 2) Entering into transaction
on own behalf instead of
principals
- ie making unauthorised
payments to himself -
SUGDEN v CROSSLAND
£75 inducement to retire
- 1) receiving remuneration
to which he is not entitled
- Existence of FR question of fact not law from
ENGLISH v DEDHAM VALE PROPERTIES LTD
- BRAY v FORD
- Only arises when a FID uses
trust property to make an
unauthorised profit
- No need to prove fraud
- Distinction between
- Being held personally
liable/in personam
- Held as CT - right in rem
so rights over property
- Being held personally
liable/in personam
- No need to prove fraud
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.