Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

equity > intermedllers > Flashcards

intermedllers Flashcards

1
Q

what liability is it usually about

A

secondary liability- knowing assistance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

purpose of this area of law

A

deter against wrongdoing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

which case defined who can be liable for and how can someone be liable for dishonest assistance

A

Barnes v Addy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what did barnes v addy do

A

define who can be liable and how someone can be liable for dishonest assistance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

who should be held to a higher standard and why

A

professionals such as bankers and solicitors because they are trained and have been working for so long that they should be able to spot dishonest behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

criticism of the Baden test (3)

A

-not a universal test

where do we put the dividing line between liability and non-liability on the scale?

-points 4 and 5 show that having the slightest bit of knowledge would make you liable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

knowing assistance was changed to what and which case was this seen in

A

dishonest assistance- seen in Tan

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Tan developed what type of liability

A

fault-based liability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what test was developed from Tan (2)

A

an objective test with the subjective element being that the D will be compared to a RP with the same personal attributes

-doesn’t require realisation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what was the test in Twinsectra

A

combined objective and subjective test

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

what was Lord Millet’s dissent in Twinsectra (2)

A
  • knowledge is more appropriate than dishonesty as a test

- dishonesty applies to a degree of intent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

critique of Twinsectra

A

-allows Ds tot plead that they did not know what was going on so they wouldn’t be held liable- D would use the no-realisation defence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

what was set out in Three Rivers DC (3)

A
  • it was set out to explain the difficulties in distinguishing between what is dishonesty and what is knowledge and
  • when liability will arise

-difficulties in the sort of knowledge required

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

which test became the test for dishonest assistance

A

Tan

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

which case went back to Tan

A

Barlow Clowes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

outcome in Barlow Clowes (2)

A
  • went back to Tan

- In order to prevent Ds pleading non-realisation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Ivey Gentling Casinos confirmed what

A

confirmed that we only require objective dishonesty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

what did Lord Nicholls say about the subjective element in Tan

A

we look at the personal attributes of the D and compare to RP

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

what 2 cases do we use to show the difference in personal attributes of the D

A

Weavering Capital- Platt did his competent best so he wasn’t objectively dishonest

where as in Barlow Clowes, Henwood was assed to a higher standard as he had much more intelligence than Platt

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

what does Brinks Ltd highlight

A

that there must be factual assistance as well as dishonesty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

2 elements of knowing receipt

A
  • Personal liability of non-trustees for losses arising to trusts
  • Liability arises where the non-trustee receives trust property in the knowledge that it is in breach of trust (beneficial receipt of property)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

one line describing knowing receipt

A

handling property for someone but knowing it came form a breach of trust

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

what does Akindele hold

  • state of knowledge
  • dishonesty
  • Baden test
A
  • The recipient’s state of knowledge must be such as to make it unconscionable for him to retain the benefit of the receipt
  • Dishonesty not required to establish liability for knowing receipt as a constructive trustee
  • Degree of knowledge in Baden were unhelpful and a single test of unconscionability was better
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

what was held in Starglade Properties Ltd

A
  • a flexible test, courts have to consider what is right

- taking into account the nature and extend of Ds knowledge and the circumstances relating to the receipt

25
Q

what did Lord Millet highlight in Twinsectra about knowing receipt (2)

A
  • Liability for knowing receipt is receipt-based. It does not depend on fault.
  • The cause of action is restitutionary- depends on unjust enrichment
26
Q

what is the 3 stage test for restitution

A
  1. Has the D been enriched?
  2. Was the enrichment engaged at the C’s expense?
  3. Was the D’s enrichment unjust with a special reason?
27
Q

what was held in Lipman Gorman

A
  • D was enriched
  • The enrichment was engaged at C’s expense
  • D’s enrichment was unjust with a special reason
28
Q

outcome in Lipman Gorman

what did Lord Goff say

A
  • The defence of change of position was recognised in this case and succeeded as a partial defence in this case
  • Lord Goff: “where an innocent Ds position is so changed that he will suffer injustice if called upon to repay, the injustice of requiring him so to repay outweighs the injustice of denying the plaintiff restitution.” “Bona fide change of position should of itself be a good defence”
29
Q

what did Akindele doubt what did they it say about unjust enrichment

A
  • Known receipt still stands, unjust enrichment is limited to particular cases
  • Doubted whether we should mix strict liability couples with a change of position and fault-based liability
30
Q

3 forms of personal claims

A
  • knowing receipt
  • dishonest assistance
  • unjust enrichment
31
Q

what is the defence to a personal claim

A

bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the breach

32
Q

what does Eagle Trust Plc say about notice

-where is notice used

A

-where the facts don’t support the inference of knowledge

33
Q

if a person used the notice defence for personal claim, what claim may they instead be liable for

A

Proprietary claim, not knowing receipt because you just need to prove that the D knows less

34
Q

notice is … to prove than knowledge

A

easier to prove

35
Q

when will there be no liability in a proprietary claim

A
  • if they have notice

- if they are an innocent party and did not know where property came from

36
Q

Re Montagu’s ST outcome

A
  • solicitor had notice, and his notice is imputed to his client
  • claim was in knowing receipt
  • in this case case ‘knowledge’ was more appropriate than ‘notice’
37
Q

3 part test to showing when someone will be liable in knowing receipt

A
  1. A disposal of Cs assets in breach of FD
  2. The beneficial receipt by the D of assets which are traceable as representing the assets of the C
  3. Knowledge on part of the D that the assets he received are traceable to a breach of trust or FD

(El Ajou)

38
Q

what 2 things did Lord Nicholls say about knowing receipt

A
  • receiving property from another after being unjustly enriched at the expense of another
  • should be strict-liability to overstep the hurdle of how much knowledge is needed (Birds agreed)
39
Q

the recipient of trust property is subject to what?

A
  • subject to the equitable proprietary claim- so he has a proprietary liability in respect of the property received or its traceable proceeds
  • it is a restitutionary claim
40
Q

what is the function of a proprietary claim being restitutionary

A

-The function is to reverse the transfer of trust property because it was vitiated, and it arises against the recipient from the fact of receipt, and irrespective of knowledge

41
Q

recipients of trust property corresponds with what type of trustee

A

express trustee

42
Q

which case showed the problem of calling people who are dishonest assistants and knowing receipts constructive trustees

A

Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria

43
Q

what did Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria say about calling people constructive trustees

A

that the law is completely obscured by confused categorisation and terminology in the law of constructive trustees

44
Q

what did Charter v City Index highlight

A

that constructive trust can be used to define the remedies for different causes of action, including breach of trust, and different types of relied

45
Q

what does Slim v Croucher argue about the term constructive trustee

A

-The D is called a trustee, but the word is merely to designate the person who took part in the transaction

46
Q

what are the 2 types of constructive trustee and which case highlights this

A
  1. act in accordance
  2. act contrary to trust from the outset

seen in Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria

47
Q

what type of constructive trustees are dishonest assistants and knowing receipts

A

type 2- acting in contrary to the trust from the outset

48
Q

when can u sue dishonest assistants and knowing receipts

A

within 6 years

49
Q

what are trustees de son tort

A

-Similar to dishonest assistants and knowing receipts but they take it upon themselves to act characteristic of the office of trustee- behaving like proper trustees

50
Q

Blyth v Fladgate outcome

A
  • Fladgate was liable because they took it upon themselves to act as the trustee even though they were not the trustee- they were made trustees of their own wrong
  • This case shows the difference between the 2 classes
51
Q

what does Lord Millet say in Dubai Aluminium about trustees do son Tort (3)

A
  • They are treated as if they have been duly appointed
  • They are true trustees and are fully subject to fiduciary obligations
  • Their liability is strict- does not depend on dishonesty
52
Q

what is the remedy for dishonest assistance (3)

  • liability?
  • remedy much larger for what?
  • amount?
A
  • Joint and several liability to compensate for loss
  • Remedy is much larger because the mental state for dishonest assistance is much higher, and much stricter than knowing assistance
  • Amount will be less than knowing receipt
53
Q

case for the remedy for dishonest assistance

A

Ultraframe (UK)

54
Q

remedy for knowing receipt

  • what is it limited to
  • liability
  • amount
A
  • Seems to be limited to the property received
  • they are liable jointly and severally with everyone else to compensate for the amount lost because of the underlying wrong
  • if many people involved each person can pay for the amount they received
55
Q

case for remedy for knowing receipt

A

-Kasikornbank

56
Q

what is the same remedy for dishonest assistance and knowing receipt (2)

A
  • account of secondary profits- profits made by underlying wrong
  • profits can be disgorged by the account of the secondary profits, as long as it was effectively caused by the underlying wrong of the dishonest assistance or knowing receipt
57
Q

case for the same remedy for DA and KR

A

Novoship (UK)

58
Q

remedy for unjust enrichment

A

restitution- returning back what is transferred (minus anything dissipated in bona fide change of position)

equity (5 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions