What is the juristic reason for automatic vesting of title by law on the death of a joint tenant?

Third, even if there were enrichment and deprivation, I echo the words of Herold J. in Harrison Estate v. Harrison, [See Note 8 below] in which he said that even if the automatic vesting of title by [page128] operation of law "enriches the survivor and deprives the estate, it surely cannot be said that there is no juristic reason for it". He identified the juristic reason as what the law dealing with joint tenancy requires. I agree with his statement [at para. 25] that "[i]t would lead to a preposterous and unfortunate result if every transfer by operation of law which occurs on the death of a joint tenant could set up a claim for a remedial constructive trust". If the law itself provides for the right of survivorship, then surely that is the juristic reason for it.