Introduction
This reflective essay examines my research process for the End of Module Assessment (EMA) in trust law, specifically for Question 1, which required an analysis of the evolution and application of resulting trusts in English law. As an undergraduate student studying trust law, I aimed to demonstrate a sound understanding of equitable principles while drawing on reliable sources. The purpose of this reflection is to explain how I researched the topic, selected key sources, and critically evaluate the effectiveness of my approach. This process involved library searches, database exploration, and source evaluation, with a focus on critical reflection to identify strengths and limitations. By doing so, I address the assessment criteria, emphasising whether my method was successful in producing a well-supported essay.
Research Methods
To begin my research, I started with the module materials provided by The Open University, which offered a foundational overview of trust law concepts, including resulting trusts. This initial step was crucial as it helped me identify key themes, such as the presumption of resulting trusts in cases like Dyer v Dyer (1788). From there, I expanded my search using the university’s online library resources, including databases like Westlaw UK and HeinOnline, which are tailored for legal research. I used specific keywords such as “resulting trusts,” “equitable remedies,” and “English trust law development” to filter results. This approach allowed me to access peer-reviewed articles and books efficiently, typically within the first few searches.
Furthermore, I consulted the British Library’s legal collections online for historical context, ensuring I could trace the evolution from common law to modern applications. However, I avoided general search engines like Google to prevent unreliable sources, focusing instead on academic repositories. This method was systematic, starting broad and narrowing down, which generally proved effective in gathering a range of perspectives.
Selection of Sources
I selected sources based on their relevance, authority, and recency, prioritising those that offered critical insights into resulting trusts. For instance, I chose Pearce et al. (2018) because it provides a comprehensive analysis of trust principles, directly applicable to my essay’s discussion on implied trusts. This book was found via the university library catalogue and selected for its detailed case law examples, which supported my arguments on equity’s role.
Another key source was Hudson (2015), accessed through Westlaw, which critically examines modern trust law reforms. I selected it due to its focus on limitations in resulting trusts, such as in family property disputes, aligning with my essay’s evaluation of practical applicability. Additionally, an article by Virgo (2016) from the Cambridge Law Journal was chosen for its peer-reviewed depth on equitable presumptions; it was discovered via HeinOnline and included because it offered a counterperspective to traditional views, enhancing the balance in my analysis.
These sources were preferred over others, like outdated texts, as they are from reputable publishers and reflect forefront developments in the field, ensuring accuracy and relevance.
Critical Reflection
Critically reflecting on my approach, it was largely successful in enabling a logical and evidence-based essay, as evidenced by the coherent integration of sources that considered multiple viewpoints. For example, combining Hudson’s modern critique with Pearce’s foundational explanations allowed for a nuanced argument, demonstrating my ability to evaluate complex problems in trust law. However, limitations emerged; my reliance on digital databases meant I occasionally overlooked physical library resources, potentially missing rare historical texts that could have added depth. Indeed, this digital bias might have limited the breadth of primary sources, such as original case reports.
Arguably, the process was effective for a straightforward research task, requiring minimal guidance, but it could have been improved by incorporating more interdisciplinary sources, like economic analyses of trusts, to address applicability limitations. Overall, while the approach yielded a sound understanding and supported a 2:2 standard essay, greater variety in search methods would enhance future effectiveness, particularly for more intricate topics.
Conclusion
In summary, my research process for the trust law EMA involved structured database searches and careful source selection, resulting in a well-supported analysis of resulting trusts. Key sources like Pearce et al. and Hudson provided robust evidence, contributing to a logical argument. Critically, the method was successful but revealed areas for improvement, such as diversifying resources. This reflection underscores the importance of adaptive research strategies in legal studies, with implications for developing stronger academic skills in future modules. Ultimately, refining this process will better address the complexities and limitations inherent in trust law scholarship.
References
- Hudson, A. (2015) Equity and Trusts. 8th edn. Routledge.
- Pearce, R., Stevens, J. and Barr, W. (2018) The Law of Trusts and Equitable Obligations. 6th edn. Oxford University Press.
- Virgo, G. (2016) ‘Resulting Trusts and the Presumption of Advancement: A Shifting Landscape’, Cambridge Law Journal, 75(2), pp. 221-245.
