Property Law (Equity & Trusts) Max word limit 2250 Case Study

Property Law (Equity & Trusts) Max word limit 2250 - Case Study specimenThere is no such statutory provision for cohabitants they are subject to the equitable rules of resulting and/or inferential trusts and/or promissory estoppel and may confirm no redress despite having made substantial contri stillions to the attention of the property and/or indirect contributions to the payment of the mortgage.This is aggravated by the lack of certainty in the justness with regard to measuring acquisition and quantification of beneficial interests. The justice received turns on the initial pleading of the claimant and the manner in which the household budget was allocated4. Typically a claimant who seeks an estoppel will have a broader range of remedies available from the judgeship than someone who seeks to establish a constructive trust based on indirect contributions. This has led to discrimination in judgments, which undermines the certainty of the law, with a subsequent increase in lit igation and costs5.The Law Commission speculated on introducing a statutory trust where registered beneficiaries would earn a pro rata proprietary interest rather than a personal undecomposed to be repaid the value of their relevant contribution(s), subject to evidence of gifts or loans6. Unfortunately it was felt that the scheme would non reduce the evidential burden and that it did not offer enough remedies. In particular the scheme did not fully address the lost economic opportunities following the breakdown of a relationship where the contributions were non-direct7. Other demesne jurisdictions have different admissiones but the same issues of uncertainty and obscurity.8 It is submitted that the focus on the family home is too foreshorten given the statistics on cohabitation and the many diverse forms which have evolved. A broader approach to shared rights in allowance is called for. As demonstrated in the Law Commissions review of other jurisdictions waiting for the courts to develop greater flexibility will necessarily be slow, strapped as they are by an Executive still focusing on the family - hence displaying a lack of understanding of the social issues - on one hand and judicial case law on the other. Advisors also will be limited by decided cases and the increasing difficulty of obtaining court-ordered aid to bring novel situations before the court. Further, the law is based on outmoded ideas of shared adjustment and the idea of common intention. The emphasis on status - with marriage being the ideal - seems to be place back the development of the law in this area. It is submitted that the evil to be overcome is not ones marital status, or whether or not children are brought up in a marriage, but inadequate financial provision for persons who have a legitimate expectation to be provided for. This should be the norm regardless of status. One absurdity of the status approach is the impact on the descendants of married versus non-married coupl es, where legitimate children can expect to be provided for whilst illegitimate children are reliant on a judges largesse.The Civil Partnership Act 2004 ss65-68 are a step in the right direction, but only covers couples of the same gender who have undergone a prescribed ceremony. Whilst non-financial contributions are recognised, this is limited by the sine qua non of a contribution of a substantial