Equity & Trusts

Equity & Trusts asks a deceptively simple question: when the strict rules of common law produce an unfair result, what does conscience demand instead? The subject governs how property is held and managed for the benefit of others, how fiduciary relationships are policed, and how courts intervene to prevent unjust enrichment. At its heart it is about obligations — who owes them, to whom, and what remedies follow when they are broken.

Four doctrines form the backbone of the subject. The three certainties (intention, subject matter, and objects) determine whether a trust is validly created at all, and the rules on constitution settle whether equity will perfect an imperfect gift. The beneficiary principle and the rules on purpose trusts define who can enforce a trust and keep it tethered to identifiable human interests. Fiduciary doctrine — the no-conflict and no-profit rules — disciplines those who hold power over another's assets, while the law of tracing allows beneficiaries to follow misapplied property through the hands of recipients. Together these doctrines explain why Equity & Trusts is inseparable from commercial law, family wealth, and professional liability.

Several areas remain genuinely contested and reward deeper attention. The reach of constructive trusts — particularly whether a fiduciary who takes a bribe holds proceeds on trust or merely faces a personal liability — divides courts and commentators, as FHR European Ventures confirmed by resolving a long-running split. The boundary between void and voidable transactions in mistake and unconscionability was reworked by Pitt v Holt and remains unsettled at the margins. Reformers also debate whether the rule in Saunders v Vautier, the extent of trustee investment duties after Cowan v Scargill, and the proper scope of remedial constructive trusts should be updated for modern commercial realities.