Parties To A Trust Equity Balance

Trust originating from British and American Equity Law is unique to British and American legal system. Later it has been adopted by the Congenital Legal System such as Japan, South Korean and Taiwan, upon which a set of Trust Laws have been established to underlain the local systems. Trust Laws in China has taken effect in 2001 after several regulation of trust business, which symbolized the preliminary setup of trust system in China. Within the trust system Equity is the core, upon which the mature and even modernization of trust system depends. And this paper aims to, through contrastive approach, empirical approach and economic approach, explore the following three questions: 1) How shall the modern trust balance the conflict between equal free value and efficiency value while maintaining the principle of trust; 2) How shall the equity of the two legal systems continue to develop in practice; 3) How shall the equity of China be interpreted and perfected. Therefore, the paper consists of four chapters.Chapter one is intended to reveal the particular reasons leading to the beneficial conflict among the trust agents. It is clearly pointed out that the function shift of trust is related to the development of trust value, i.e., from the pursuit of extreme individual freedom to the pursuit of efficiency. However, the inborn flexibility of trust makes it impossible to deny the existence of individual freedom, in other words, it is essential to recognize the individual freedom while it is the ultimate goal to chase the entity economic profit. Thus, it is inevitable to face the conflict between the efficiency and freedom and the conflict takes the form of multi-conflict among several benefits in practice. Moreover, the fundamental principles of trust, especially the independence of trust property and peculiar legal composition of trust, serve as the important reason to cause the beneficial conflict among trust agents, and those principles make trust legally different from agent,, third person value stipulation and company.Chapter two aims to portray the specific representation of the beneficial conflict between trust agents. The main conflict between client and beneficiary is that the client is to control the life style of beneficiary through the establishment of special trust; and the conflict between client and agent is that whether the intention of clients is abided. In addition, under the modern continental legal system, there is another conflict between the expansion of clients' right and restriction of agents' management. Since the client and beneficiary is the administer of trust property and benefit taker perspective, the conflict is likely to occur, depending on whether the agent perform their basic responsibility of "to the best of beneficiary". Virtually, the conflict is the striving between the expansion and restriction of clients' right of freedom.Chapter three deals with contrastive analysis of the equity between the British and American legal system and the continental legal system. It begins with the elaboration of the legal foundation of equity of the two legal systems, in order to reflect its theoretical foundation. That is to say, it is favorable to balance the beneficial conflict through the regulation of the complicated trust relationship with the aids of existing contract theory, thus it is doubtful to keep on research on the nature of trust of the continental legal system. However, it is not to be ignored that the study of trust stipulation doesn't mean the replace of trust by contract, it only means that the current problem might be interpreted better based on the contract theory owing to the disequilibria of modern trust caused by its development. Finally, the chapter is to compare the equity of trust between the two legal systems and make the comments.Chapter four is to illustrate the challenge with which Chinese trust equity is confronted. Trust in China is different from others in that the status of client is stressed and expanded, which the author of the paper is in favor o...