100%(2)2 out of 2 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 9 - 16 out of 79 pages.
•The effect of Deane J’s re-classification has been to allow courts to choose the time from which a constructive trust arises, and in that sense the remedial function of the trust is given effect through the imposition of the institution of trust
Remedy or institution?•The effect of Deane J’s re-classification has been to allow courts to choose the time from which a constructive trust arises, and in that sense the remedial function of the trust is given effect through the imposition of the institution of trust•. If a judge has decided to impose a constructive trust retrospectively, equity regards as done what ought to have been done and the trust is considered to have existed as an institution from that time onwards, rather than from the time of the order
Remedy or institution?•The problem with the exercise of such discretion is the uncertainty it generates for third parties who have an interest in the property in question. This is particularly the case in insolvencies where the parties are jostling for priority to access property to satisfy their debts •The institutional view of a constructive trust might be signficantly unfair to unsecured creditors who were not aware of the existence of a constructive trust, but may nevertheless find their claims cannot be satisfied because the property is held on trust
Remedy or institution?•In Parsons v McBain(2001) 109 FCR 120, when discussing the imposition of common intention constructive trusts the Full Federal Court held that the trust was created by the conduct of the parties and arose at that time, even if that had the effect of defeating unsecured creditors. •This has been followed in later cases: Jabbour v Sherwood  FCA 529; Parianos v Melluish (Trustee)(2003) 30 Fam LR 524. •In Clout v Markwell  QSC 91 at , it was said that creditors should be expected to be aware of constructive trusts which may arise when the debtor is married or in a de facto relationship.
Remedy or institution?In Australian Building and Technical Solutions Pty Ltd v Boumelhem  NSWSC 460, parents had provided funds to their son to purchase land and build duplexes on it, one of which would be transferred into the parents’ names on completion.Parents had increased the mortgage on their own home to get the funds.Property used as security on debts owed by his business. Business then collapsed Parents claimed an interest under both a resulting trust (to secure their initial contribution) and a constructive trust (for later contributions they made to the building effort). These claims were resisted by the son’s creditors.
Remedy or institution?Ward J declared that there was a resulting trust for the contributions to the purchase price but did not order a constructive trust over the further amounts paid by the parents. These amounts were instead secured by equitable liens which could then be ranked against the other security interests held by the creditors.
Differences with express and resulting trusts•Millet J in Lonhro v Fayed (No 2) 4