2011•Singapore Academy of Law journalRequires access

Constructive Trusts: Deciphering and Distinguishing 'Institutional' and 'Remedial'

Tsun Hang Tey

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

This article attempts to decipher and distinguish institutional constructive trusts and remedial constructive trusts. It argues that the remedial constructive trust is workable as a principled application of unconscionability as a doctrine. The institutional constructive trust, on the other hand, looks to something more than unconscionability. There must be circumstances pointing to a relationship that provided for impairment of title or that there was a common intention to share which impairs title. Unconscionability would then stem from the fact that the defendant is disavowing the prior relationship or agreement, and instead wishes to insist on his strict legal rights. It argues that it is not acceptable to conflate the two concepts together to introduce some form of remedial discretion.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article attempts to decipher and distinguish institutional constructive trusts and remedial constructive trusts. It argues that the remedial constructive trust is workable as a principled application of unconscionability as a doctrine. The institutional constructive trust, on the other hand, looks to something more than unconscionability. There must be circumstances pointing to a relationship that provided for impairment of title or that there was a common intention to share which impairs title. Unconscionability would then stem from the fact that the defendant is disavowing the prior relationship or agreement, and instead wishes to insist on his strict legal rights. It argues that it is not acceptable to conflate the two concepts together to introduce some form of remedial discretion.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article attempts to decipher and distinguish institutional constructive trusts and remedial constructive trusts. It argues that the remedial constructive trust is workable as a principled application of unconscionability as a doctrine. The institutional constructive trust, on the other hand, looks to something more than unconscionability. There must be circumstances pointing to a relationship that provided for impairment of title or that there was a common intention to share which impairs title. Unconscionability would then stem from the fact that the defendant is disavowing the prior relationship or agreement, and instead wishes to insist on his strict legal rights. It argues that it is not acceptable to conflate the two concepts together to introduce some form of remedial discretion.

Key concepts: Constructive trust, Unconscionability, Remedial education, Constructive, Discretion, Doctrine, Law, Estoppel

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Constructive Trusts: Deciphering and Distinguishing 'Institutional' and 'Remedial' — Research Paper | ScholarLens