Cloutte v Storey: 1911

A trust power was exercised in favour of one of the objects, but under a private arrangement whereby he passed the benefit back to his parents, who had made the appointment.
Held: Farwell LJ spoke of a compromise of proceedings sanctioned by a court, saying that compromises of ascertained specific questions are not to be construed ‘so as to deprive any party thereto of any right not then in dispute and not in contemplation by any of the parties to such deed.’ and ‘the mere fact that the appointment is void does not prevent the court of equity from having regard to it e.g. an appointment under a limited power to a stranger is void, but equity may cause effect to be given to it by means of the doctrine of election’.


Farwell LJ


[1911] 1 Ch 18

Cited by:

CitedFutter and Another v Futter and Others ChD 11-Mar-2010
Various family settlements had been created. The trustees wished to use the rule in Hastings-Bass to re-open decisions they had made after receiving incorrect advice.
Held: The deeds were set aside as void. The Rule in Hastings-Bass derives . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.408858