Introduction to the Law of Trusts by Simon Gardner

Book review of Prof Gardiner's work on Trusts, thrid edition.

CASENOTES - Fitzkriston LLP v Panayi - Best Rents, Parol leases and Law of Property Act 1925 Section 54(2)

Casenote considers nature of ruling in Fitzkriston v Panayi and its implications for the interpretation of S.54(2) Law of Property Act 1925

The 'law of requisite variety' may assist climate change negotiations:a review of the Kyoto and Durban meetings

Ashby wrote about cybernetics, during which discourse he described a Law that attempts to resolve difficulties arising in complex situations – he suggested using variety to combat complexity. In this paper, we note that the delegates to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) meeting in Kyoto, 1997, were offered a ‘simplifying solution’ to cope with the complexity of discussing multiple pollutants allegedly contributing to ‘climate change’. We assert that the adoption of CO2eq has resulted in imprecise thinking regarding the ‘carbon footprint’ – that is, ‘CO2’ – to the exclusion of other pollutants. We propose, as Ashby might have done, that the CO2eq and other factors within the ‘climate change’ negotiations be disaggregated to allow careful and specific individual solutions to be agreed on each factor. We propose a new permanent and transparent ‘action group’ be in charge of agenda setting and to manage the messy annual meetings. This body would be responsible for achieving accords at these annual meetings, rather than forcing this task on national hosts. We acknowledge the task is daunting and we recommend moving on from Ashby's Law to Beer's Viable Systems approach.

Overlapping of legal concepts:classifying the law of trusts

The purpose of this piece is to explain how the trust concept fits the overlapping analysis, presenting an example of why discrete categorisation is often unhelpful in understanding the operation of legal concepts.

Certainty of subject matter in the law of trusts

This piece argued that the accepted orthodoxy concerning the requirement that each individual piece of property is individually segregated for a valid trust to exist is unsupported by the case law, and that there is nothing wrong in principle or theory with a trust that exists for unsegregated property.