Trust Me, It’ll Be Yours One Day

Remedial Constructive Trusts in Ireland: Lessons from Finnegan v Hand

In Finnegan v Hand [2016] IEHC255 the Irish High Court made a significant ruling, recognising the concept of a remedial constructive trust in parallel with the continuous development of equitable remedies before the Irish Courts.

The Court heard that the Plaintiff had worked on the deceased’s farm for 38 years, during which time he was underpaid and had made significant personal sacrifices throughout his employment. He accepted such conditions of employment on foot of repeated suggestions by the deceased, made both directly and indirectly, that he would inherit part of the farm. The deceased then died intestate, and the Plaintiff advanced arguments to claim a share of the estate based on promissory estoppel, a remedial constructive trust, or alternatively quantum meruit.

Why the High Court Imposed a Remedial Constructive Trust

The Court held that, given the Plaintiff had relied on the assurances of the deceased to his detriment, it would be unconscionable for the estate to pass strictly and entirely to blood relatives in the circumstances.

Given the ambiguity of the deceased’s assurances to the Plaintiff, the Court preferred to impose a remedial constructive trust, as opposed proprietary estoppel as the assurances were too uncertain to enforce as specific promises. The Court considered the House of Lords judgment in Thorner v Majors where a remedial trust was found to exist, despite no express representations having been made but instead were implicated and inferred from indirect statements and conduct which had been made.

The Plaintiff was awarded a defined share of the farm, livestock and farm machinery, while the deceased’s next of kin were given the benefit of the deceased’s bank accounts.

What Finnegan v Hand Means for Equitable Remedies in Ireland

The ruling is an important one and confirms that Irish Courts are willing to intervene and develop novel remedies to prevent unconscionable outcomes. It also highlights the flexibility and utility of equitable remedies and their ability to be adapted to changing circumstances.

For more information please contact Bernard King.

The content of this article is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute legal or other advice.