Sole Legal Ownership Constructive Trust

O`Neill v Holland [2020] offers a variation on the old classic. The appellant, Natalie O`Neill, had related claims, but the appeal was for her application for a 50% interest in 53 Worsley Road, Farnworth, Bolton, a property held in the sole name of her former partner Shaun Holland. In England and Wales, there is only one legal reason for divorce, and that is that the marriage has failed. Implied trust is the duty of a person or company to hold property for another person or company. Constructive trust is established by a court as a “just remedy”. A fair remedy is at the discretion of the court and is not in accordance with any law. The assets are held in the common name, but there is no explicit declaration of confidence in economic interests. This not only moves away from the resulting trusts (as discussed above), but also gives the appearance of disapproval of the Court`s approach to quantification in Oxley v. Hiscock (a matter of exclusive legal ownership). In reviewing Shaun`s appeal, it was suggested that an applicant would not have to prove impairment to establish constructive trust in common intent. This has been consistently denied by both courts, citing the recent Curran v Collins case [2016] in which Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson`s summary of the law in Grant (above) was approved, including the fact that impairment was part of the test.

Moreover, in Curran, supra, the General Court held that the fact that Ms Curran had not acted in any way to her detriment was `fatal` to her case. In this article, Paul Golden, a brilliant lawyer with a passion for magic, cleverly reveals the fairness court`s sleight of hand in converting evil thieves (or business opponents) into constructive trustees. In this well-ordered and accessible book, Mr. Golden takes the reader behind the scenes, taking us step by step through the law and procedures of this otherwise subtle and mystifying area of law. This book should be on the shelves of any serious or neutral commercial litigator who needs to unravel the mystery of this just remedy in cases in a variety of material fields. Simeon H. Baum, Esq., President, Resolve Mediation Services, Inc. (, founding chair of the NYSBA Dispute Resolution Section and long-time mediation trainer for the NYS Courts Commercial Division. What is constructive healing trust (also called constructive trust)? Constructive trust is created to remedy (or balance) a situation where there is “unjust enrichment.” If someone owns property (money, real estate or other assets) that they should not own because they wrongly acquired them through fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, it is unjust enrichment. Constructive trust is built to resolve the unjust situation that has occurred. However, his reflections support the view that the actions of someone other than the applicant could lead to constructive trust and open up opportunities for exploration for an applicant. For example, let`s say Larry stole $5,000 from Ahmed and used that money to buy a used car.

Ahmed is understandably upset and sues Larry for the money and the judge agrees with Ahmed. The used car can receive constructive trust, so Larry is no longer its true owner. Roommates and other co-owners or co-occupants of property often do not indicate the extent of their respective economic interests in the shared apartment. This can lead to significant uncertainty if, for example, the relationship breaks down later or if a trustee or creditor of one of the parties tries to realize that person`s deemed share of the property. A resulting trust differs from a constructive trust because it is a trust established based on an individual`s intentions. O`Neill has some practical and legal points for practitioners. The reason for this is presumably that if the parties had known that the reason why the property was not in the common names was that they would have held it jointly. A warning that honesty really is the best property policy: It`s better to simply tell your partner that you don`t want them to have an interest in the new home and suffer the consequences than to try to cheat on them and watch the lie unfold years later in court. A maximum of four people can be the legal owners of property in England and Wales. According to the law, these people have equal property.

A lifetime deed of assets is a way to transfer ownership of real estate. However, that presumption may be dissatisfied by the imposition of an implied trust with common intention, the establishment of which, unlike express trusts, does not necessarily have to be in writing under section 53(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925. There is no doubt that it was worse for Natalie to move 53 Worsley Road to Shaun`s name alone than to put them in common names. However, it is difficult to see how Natalie “acted” under these circumstances: the transfer would have been between her father and Shaun; Your consent to this does not seem relevant. In 2008, when Natalie and Shaun were still a couple living with their family at 53 Worsley Road, 53 Worsley Road was transferred by John to the sole name Shaun. Unlike traditional express trusts, which are planned well in advance, where all parties involved agree on the roles of trustee and beneficiary, constructive trust is trust created solely by a judge as a full-fledged remedy – powerful, nuanced and often complex and discouraging. Whether you are advocating for them or defending yourself in such a case, this book is an essential guide on the topic that covers important considerations a practitioner should be aware of, including strategies for dealing with pleadings, discoveries, movement exercises, and court proceedings. The property is held in the name of only one party (again, assuming there is no declaration of trust stating that the property is held in trust for that party and the co-tenant/co-user and declaring their respective shares) The cases of Oxley v Hiscock (sole proprietor) and Stack v Dowden (co-owner) are the main current cases in this area of law. In both cases, it is what justifies an economic interest in a property. Beneficial ownership is a legal concept that refers to who has an interest in a property.