Remedies and the Baumgartner Joint Endeavour Principle: Aspects of the Minimum Equity Rule

The doctrine in Baumgartner v Baumgartner – the joint endeavour principle – is now a firmly entrenched feature of Australian equity jurisprudence. However, substantial uncertainties remain as to its remedial operation. It is unclear when the principle can override other doctrines, such as resulting trusts and equitable estoppel, in providing a remedy. It is also unclear if the quantum and form of such a remedy can be determined in accordance with legal principle, including where interested third parties are present. These obscurities have led to significant academic criticism of the doctrine. This article argues that these uncertainties can be resolved by attention to the minimum equity rule: the notion that equity will only grant the minimum remedy necessary to relieve the conscience of the defendant. In so arguing, the joint endeavour principle is upheld, contrary to the academic commentary, as an example, par excellence, of the principled development of the law.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
University of New South Wales Law Journal
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.53637/wazd9248
Primary Topic
Taxation and Legal Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Remedies and the Baumgartner Joint Endeavour Principle: Aspects of the Minimum Equity Rule

Mackenzie Williams
University of New South Wales Law Journal
Taxation and Legal Issues
article

Remedies and the Baumgartner Joint Endeavour Principle: Aspects of the Minimum Equity Rule

Mackenzie Williams
article en

Abstract

The doctrine in Baumgartner v Baumgartner – the joint endeavour principle – is now a firmly entrenched feature of Australian equity jurisprudence. However, substantial uncertainties remain as to its remedial operation. It is unclear when the principle can override other doctrines, such as resulting trusts and equitable estoppel, in providing a remedy. It is also unclear if the quantum and form of such a remedy can be determined in accordance with legal principle, including where interested third parties are present. These obscurities have led to significant academic criticism of the doctrine. This article argues that these uncertainties can be resolved by attention to the minimum equity rule: the notion that equity will only grant the minimum remedy necessary to relieve the conscience of the defendant. In so arguing, the joint endeavour principle is upheld, contrary to the academic commentary, as an example, par excellence, of the principled development of the law.

University of New South Wales Law JournalVol. 47(4)
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
Taxation and Legal Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.