Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.296989
Title: Resulting trusts and the law of restitution
Author: Chambers, Robert
ISNI:       0000 0000 7901 2856
Awarding Body: University of Oxford
Current Institution: University of Oxford
Date of Award: 1995
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
This thesis explores the nature of the resulting trust and its role in the law of restitution. Part One examines the situations in which resulting trusts arise. Chapters I (Apparent Gifts) and II (Trusts Which Fail) concern the traditional categories of resulting trust; III (Quistclose trusts) and IV (Failure of Consideration) look at resulting trusts which arise when property has been transferred for limited purposes which become incapable of fulfilment. It is concluded that all resulting trusts operate on the same principle, arising when property is transferred to another and the provider of that property did not intend to benefit the recipient. The presumption of resulting trust is an inference of that lack of intention. The presumption of advancement is an inference that a gift was intended. The distinction between 'presumed' and 'automatic' resulting trusts is rejected. Part Two explores the relationship between resulting trusts and restitution. It is argued in chapter V (Restitution) that all resulting trusts reverse unjust enrichment. The restitutionary role of the resulting trust is considered by looking at (i) the types of unjust enrichment to which it responds, in chapters VI (Vitiated Intention), VII (Qualified Intention) and VIII (Mere Equities), and (ii) how it responds, in chapters IX (First- Measure Liability) and X (Fiduciary Obligations). Any defect in or qualification of the provider's intention to benefit the recipient, which gives the provider a right to restitution, should give rise to a resulting trust, so long as the property remains identifiable and the recipient has not obtained the unfettered beneficial ownership of that property before the right to restitution arises. This thesis concludes by looking at three areas affected by this view of resulting trusts: (i) the classification of trusts, (ii) proprietary restitution and (iii) defences to restitutionary claims. When trusts are organised by the events which give rise to them, the primary trust responding to unjust enrichment (by subtraction) is resulting.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.296989  DOI: Not available
Keywords: Law
Share: