Constructive: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 7: Line 7:
Then there are [[constructive trust]]s, fabulous creatures of the [[courts of chancery]], which deem one fellow the fiduciary of another for matters which, in plain sight, he was not.
Then there are [[constructive trust]]s, fabulous creatures of the [[courts of chancery]], which deem one fellow the fiduciary of another for matters which, in plain sight, he was not.


But, like a [[Ferae naturae|bitey wild animal]], or an [[Rylands v Fletcher - Case Note|ordinarily docile, if unkempt, reservoir]], the concept can flood its bulwarks. So the unwilling student assures his enquiring mother that he has ''constructively'' done his homework. Well, I sure did.
But, like a [[Ferae naturae|bitey wild animal]], or an [[Rylands v Fletcher - Case Note|ordinarily docile, if unkempt, reservoir]], the concept can flood its bulwarks. So, the unwilling student — for it was I —who assured his enquiring [[Grandma Contrarian|mama]] that he has ''constructively'' done his homework. Well, I sure did.


The constructiveness of notice got a bit of an airing, albeit [[obiter dicta]] in that Hannibal Lecter of a decision in {{casenote|Citigroup|Brigade Capital Management}}. In New York law “it means a person either knows or has reason to know” the fact in question; “reason to know” including “other facts known to the person would make it reasonable to infer the existence of the fact, or prudent to conduct further equity that would reveal it.”
The constructiveness of notice got a bit of an airing, albeit ''[[obiter dicta]]'' in that Hannibal Lecter of a decision in {{casenote|Citigroup|Brigade Capital Management}}: In New York law, “it means a person either knows ''or has reason to know''” the fact in question; “reason to know” including “other facts known to the person would make it reasonable to infer the existence of the fact, or prudent to conduct further equity that would reveal it.”
 
By that test the JC would have passed all his law exams at the first time of asking, not the third, and the world would be a happy place indeed.


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*[[Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1994]] section 3(1) of which has rather a nifty rider requiring at least [[constructive knowledge]], which rancorous chargees will try to undermine.
*[[Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1994]] section 3(1) of which has rather a nifty rider requiring at least [[constructive knowledge]], which rancorous chargees will try to undermine.
*[[Ferae naturae]]


{{draft}}
{{draft}}
{{egg}}
{{egg}}