| dc.description.abstract | English law was received to Sri Lankan legal system in two ways mainly; by statutes and by judicial activism. In Sri Lanka present context, Law of trust is governed via substantive law and common law principles, mainly from the Trust Ordinance and by judiciary precedence. For decades the trust ordinance and case laws was consider as the supreme legal authority to adjudicate the legal issues relevant to the area of trust. According to the Trust Ordinance there are several types of trust can be established .Mainly express trust, implied trust (Constructive trust), resulting trust, and charitable trust .For the purpose of this paper, issues relating to the constructive trust is evaluated in detail. Comparing to the other types of trust constructive trust is much controversial. Hence it does not require verbal or documentary expressions to create a trust. In this backdrop doctoring of constructive trust is taken as offensive and defensive weapon by legal practitioners in the area that issues relating to the transactions of property. It should be the responsibility of judiciary to evaluate the cases in a wide spectrum. Since judiciary precedence is conceded as souses of law and it impact to the adjudicating process to establish the justice. Based on this backdrop it is clear that judgments should be competent and constant, if not it creates an ambiguity. This research paper is based to evaluate and indicate how creativity of judiciary impacts to establish the justice even it creates a dilemma: whether constructive trust can create on illegal purpose. | en_US |
