Equity and Trusts: Examining Equitable Principles in Ownership Cases

This assignment delves into the intricacies of Equity and Trusts, focusing on the application of equitable principles to cohabiting couples, specifically comparing joint and sole ownership scenarios. Section A provides a critical analysis of whether equitable principles are more flexible in joint ownership cases compared to sole ownership. The analysis examines the legal frameworks and practical implications for couples in both situations, considering factors like decision-making, property rights, and dispute resolution. Section B presents a case study involving bequests and subsequent actions, advising Jerry and Ben on the validity of the bequests and the lawfulness of their actions. The case study explores issues of communication, intent, and the fulfillment of testamentary wishes, providing a legal perspective on the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved. The conclusion summarizes the key findings, emphasizing the importance of clear legal frameworks and communication in ownership and inheritance matters. The assignment draws on legal principles and case law to provide a comprehensive understanding of Equity and Trusts in the context of cohabiting couples and property ownership.

Equity and Trusts

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
SECTION A.....................................................................................................................................3
Question 2) Critically analyse whether the equitable principles for cohabiting couples are
more flexible for joint ownership cases, as compared to the principles for sole ownership
cases........................................................................................................................................3
SECTION 2......................................................................................................................................6
Question 4) Advise Jerry and Ben as to the validity of the bequests and the lawfulness of their
subsequent actions..................................................................................................................6
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................8
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................9

INTRODUCTION
Equity is defined as the justice and fairness to any of the person. It is necessary because it
tells that each and every person should be treated equally in any of the place. While talking about
“Trust”, it refers to the situation where rights of the property is with any specific person but still
legal system try to bring equality in which they decide to take the best possible decision to
provide benefit to another person from respective property. Equality and Trust is one of the most
important law which tells about the rights that an individual must get. In this respective project,
discussion will be based on two section where first section will be all about critical analysis on
principle for cohabiting couple are more flexible for joint ownership cases compared to sole
ownership cases. In section B, case studies will be solved as per the given situation.
SECTION A
Question 2) Critically analyse whether the equitable principles for cohabiting couples are more
flexible for joint ownership cases, as compared to the principles for sole ownership cases.
Equitable Principles is defined as the law and regulation which relates to the rights and
authorities which should be distributed equally to each and every member. It says that people
should be treated equally so that any kind of issues do not come across them while taking of the
decisions. While talking about cohabiting couples, it is understandable that the situation where
couple live together before the marriage and it is necessary to understand in this case that whose
liability is what while conducting any of the business activity1. There are two types of equitable
principles for cohabiting couple and they are explained below in detail. Joint ownership cases: It is the situation where legal contract is prepared and signed by
the involved number of partners so that any kind of dispute or problem will not be raised.
1 Paul S. Davies and James E. Penner, Equity, Trust, And Commerce.

Whenever contract is signed, then it becomes easy for the owner of property to decide
who have got which kind of role. In this, it is said that any of the owner is not allowed to
sell the property to any of the person without asking any things. In this, it is more
important that people who are involved will get equal rights on the property. Here, profit
sharing is also mentioned and losses are also explained that who will be liable to bear
what percentage of loss if they sell the any of the property2. It helps to maintain
relationship between all of the involved parties. The most important thing which is found
in Joint ownership cases is that equality is maintained in it. For example: If two or more
than two joint partners have bought any of the property and in any of the situation dispute
arises between the involved parties then equal distribution can be done very easily
without taking any of the help form court proceeding or alternative way to resolve the
issues because legal documents will be helpful here.
 Sole Ownership cases: It is the type of ownership on the property where involvement of
single person is only found due to which it becomes very easy to take most of the
decision related to business and property. Only one person is allowed to operate day to
day activity due to which any of the decisions which are taken by another person are not
counted as valid. If two are more than two persons are involved in sole ownership then
Equality and trust will not be maintained due to which taking any of the decisions will
not bring any of the result. For example: In case of cohabiting couple, the legal rights and
equality and trust will not be applicable in sole ownership cases because legal documents
will be in the name of only one member to whom property belongs.
Here, while doing critical analysis it can be easily understood that joint ownership is
more helpful and effective because decision making process is very easy and simple. All of the
2 Richard Riddell, Equity, Trust And The Self-Improving Schools System.

involved member can take their own decision of own but before that, approval is required to
taken. In case of sole ownership, it is necessary to do all the legal formalities due to which it can
be easily decided that who will take care of all the properties which have been delegated to them.
In joint ownership any of the partners dies it doesn't affect much and more because all the rights
are given to the other person who is involved in that joint ownership partnership. While talking
about sole proprietorship, it becomes very difficult to decided that to whom the rights of
property should be given because it is one lengthiest process where involvement of court place
the most important role that who will be the next owner of the property3. There are various
benefits of joint ownership but still there are various points which can prove that problem is still
there because in joint ownership non of the partner is allowed to take any of the decision of own.
In addition, it is said that if owner dies there is not fix that who will be the owner of property but
in joint ownership uses and decided this sort of things of own which makes work more easier and
faster. In short, it can be concluded that any of the person should try to adopt sole ownership
rather than trying to adopt joint ownership because it is said that legal system of sole owner is
more flexible then joint ownership.
SECTION B
Question 4) Advise Jerry and Ben as to the validity of the bequests and the lawfulness of their
subsequent actions.
Given case study: a) Timothy prepared the Will in which he told Jerry to hold the Art
studio till he communicate. b) he gave the collection of car to Ben
3 Guillermo Suárez Blázquez, 'TRIÁNGULO HISTÓRICO JURÍDICO MÁGICO: FIDEICOMISO & EQUITY &
TRUST/A HISTORY MAGIC TRIANGLE: FIDEICOMISO & EQUITY & TRUST' (2017) 10 REVISTA
QUAESTIO IURIS.

After the period of seven days, while doing lunch with Chloe, Timothy decided to call
Jerry but he was out so Timothy decided to left a message to voice note where he clearly instruct
Jerry to hold Art Studio for Chloe, his nephew, who was undeveloped young artist. In addition,
Jerry's son Barney is studying in Art college. He is looking for somewhere to display his latest
collection of art work. Here, Jerry is saying that he had not received any of the phone message
and that's why he gave the title of Art studio to Barney as he believes Barney is more deserving
than Chloe who merely has a passing interest in Art.
Two weeks before Timothy created his Will, he told Ben of his intention to leave him his
classic car collection and gave him a sealed envelope, to be opened upon his death, with
instructions on what to do with the collection. Ben was so upset at the prospect of losing his
friend that he just took the envelope and left without saying a word4. Upon Timothy’s death, Ben
opened the sealed envelope and discovered that the classic car collection was to be sold and the
proceeds given to Timothy’s estranged son Bert. Ben believes that he did not accept this
responsibility.
Advice to Jerry
It was one of the case where it was simple to understand that Jerry should have hold the
property till the next order Timothy because it was clearly mentioned that Jerry was required to
hold till receiving any of the next notice from Timothy. As, will was prepared by the Timothy
and it was one of the sole ownership in which orders are to be followed of real owner and
because of that it was important to work as per the instruction. Here, Jerry is not allowed to
transfer the rights of art studio to his son Barney although he was well educated and qualified in
that particular field. In this case, if Jerry had not received any of the notice from Timothy then he
must have called back to him and should have ask about the art studio that whether he can
4 Lars Kaiser, 'Public Trust And Equity Returns' [2015] SSRN Electronic Journal.

transfer the rights to his son or should he is required to still hold it tell the next call5. Overall
there was the communication gap between the party and even offer and acceptance was there that
Jerry will hold the property till the next communication process so here transfer of property to
Barney is invalid and because of that documents of property will be transferred as per the choice
of Timothy. Here, talent and candidate doesn't deserve the right because it is all about property
and regulation where decision are needed to be considered the most.
Advices to Ben
It was the situation where it was found that there was no offer and acceptance in this
situation because envelop was given just to open it after the death of Timothy. As will was
transferred to Ben and further decisions were not given in it so it can be easily said that Ben will
not be liable to sell the collection of car and pay the money to unloved son of Timothy named as
Bert. Here, it was important for Timothy to clear out the point that what can be the main points
that can be covered in envelop6. As, Timothy didn't inform anything to Ben then as per the law of
Equality and Trust he will not be liable to pay any amount of money to Bert by selling the
collection of car on which Ben have the legal rights. Here, Ben case file the case in court where
he is required to prove the matter of case and if can succeed in this particular case then he will
not be liable to sell any of the collection of car any pay the collected money to the son of
Timothy. The most important thing in this case was that Ben was the only owner of the
collection car once will be transferred to him by Timothy but the documents which was there in
the envelop will not be counted as valid.
In addition, it can be understand that each and every person should try to make sure that
all the terms and condition are clear, so that any kind of problem will not arise later on.
5 Paul Matthews, 'Trusts & Equity – How Dumb Is The Blind Trust?' (2012) 1998 Amicus Curiae.
6 Preserving Farms For Farmers (Equity Trust 2009).

Similarly, in the above given situation it was found that given condition in the Will was not
favourable to both the party due to which problem has been created7. Also, Ben will not be liable
to give any sort of money to Bert as there was lack of proper communication and preparation of
law and even Ben was not liable for taking the responsibility of selling the car in this case.
CONCLUSION
It short, it can be concluded from the file that equality and trust is one of the important
concept which tells and decide what is right and what is wrong and who should get what
percentage of share within any of the property. In joint ownership, the owner of property is two
or more then two due to which any of the owner is not allowed to sell the property without
obtaining the authority. In addition, it can be said that sole ownership has only owner who has
the right to take any of the decision which he wants to take. While entering into any of the
contract it is important to clear each and every term so that any kind of issue will not be created
in future.
7 Andrew M. Jones, 'Equity, Opportunity And Health' [2019] Empirica.

REFERENCES
Books & Journals
Blázquez G, 'TRIÁNGULO HISTÓRICO JURÍDICO MÁGICO: FIDEICOMISO & EQUITY &
TRUST/A HISTORY MAGIC TRIANGLE: FIDEICOMISO & EQUITY & TRUST' (2017) 10
REVISTA QUAESTIO IURIS.
Davies PJ Penner, Equity, Trust, And Commerce.
Jones A, 'Equity, Opportunity And Health' [2019] Empirica.
Kaiser L, 'Public Trust And Equity Returns' [2015] SSRN Electronic Journal.
Matthews P, 'Trusts & Equity – How Dumb Is The Blind Trust?' (2012) 1998 Amicus Curiae
Preserving Farms For Farmers (Equity Trust 2009).
Riddell R, Equity, Trust And The Self-Improving Schools System.