Constructive Trust vs Resulting Trust

In trusts law, constructive and resulting trusts are two types of implied trusts that arise due to specific circumstances rather than explicit intent expressed in a trust instrument. Both serve to address situations where the strict application of legal principles would result in unjust outcomes, but they differ significantly in their foundations, purposes, and applications.

Constructive Trust
A constructive trust is an equitable remedy imposed by the courts to prevent unjust enrichment. It arises when someone has wrongfully obtained or retained legal title to property, and it would be inequitable for them to enjoy the benefits of that property. The primary purpose of a constructive trust is to rectify wrongdoing and to restore property to its rightful owner or to ensure it is held for the benefit of another who has a better claim to it.

Constructive trusts can arise in various situations, such as when there is fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, or other forms of unconscionable conduct. For example, if a trustee embezzles funds from a trust, the court may impose a constructive trust over the misappropriated funds to ensure they are returned to the trust. Similarly, if one person promises to transfer property to another in exchange for some benefit, and then reneges on that promise, the court might impose a constructive trust to enforce the promise and prevent unjust enrichment.

The imposition of a constructive trust does not depend on the intention of the parties involved. Instead, it is a remedy that the court applies to address the circumstances of the case. The court’s focus is on equity and fairness, aiming to prevent one party from unjustly benefiting at the expense of another.

Resulting Trust
A resulting trust, on the other hand, arises from the implied intention of the parties based on their contributions or circumstances surrounding the transaction. It typically comes into play when there is a failure of an express trust or when property is transferred under circumstances suggesting that the transferee is not intended to have beneficial ownership. Resulting trusts are commonly divided into two categories: 

1. Automatic Resulting Trusts: These occur when there is a failure to dispose of the entire beneficial interest in a trust. For instance, if a trust document specifies that property is to be held on trust for a specific purpose, but that purpose is not completely fulfilled, the remaining property will be held on a resulting trust for the settlor or their estate.
2. Presumed Resulting Trusts: These arise when property is transferred to someone without receiving consideration, and the circumstances suggest that the transferee is not intended to have beneficial ownership. An example of this is when one person provides the purchase money for property, but the property is registered in the name of another. Unless there is evidence to suggest a gift was intended, the courts will presume a resulting trust, implying that the property should be held for the benefit of the person who provided the funds.
   
   

Unlike constructive trusts, resulting trusts are based on the presumed or actual intentions of the parties involved. They serve to reflect the underlying beneficial interests based on contributions or the purpose of the transfer. The court looks at the intentions and contributions of the parties to determine who should hold the beneficial interest in the property.

There are four major differences between constructive trusts and resulting trusts:

1. Constructive trusts are imposed by the court to address unjust enrichment and are based on the principle of equity. Resulting trusts arise from the implied or presumed intentions of the parties and reflect underlying beneficial interests.
2. The primary purpose of a constructive trust is to prevent unjust enrichment and rectify wrongdoing. Resulting trusts, however, aim to reflect the true beneficial ownership based on contributions or the failure of an express trust.
3. Constructive trusts can arise in cases of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, or other unconscionable conduct. Resulting trusts typically arise when property is transferred without consideration or when there is a failure to dispose of the entire beneficial interest in a trust.
4. In constructive trusts, the court imposes the trust as a remedy based on equitable principles. In resulting trusts, the court identifies and enforces the implied or presumed intentions of the parties involved.

In conclusion, constructive and resulting trusts are essential tools in equity to ensure fairness and justice in the ownership and distribution of property. Constructive trusts focus on preventing unjust enrichment by imposing a trust where there has been wrongdoing, while resulting trusts reflect the implied intentions and contributions of the parties. Understanding the distinctions between these two types of implied trusts is crucial for resolving complex property disputes and ensuring equitable outcomes.