A trustee put trust money into his bank account and then used some of the funds from that bank account to buy shares. The rest of the money in the account was dissipated, and the shares were worth less than the trust money which had been misappropriated.
Held: The trustee was not entitled to claim that it was the trust money which had dissipated and that the investment was made from the trustee’s own money. The investment was presumed to have been made with the trust’s money, meaning the trust could claim a proprietary interest in the shares irrespective of the order of withdrawals. For the purposes of the equitable remedy of tracing, if A is able to trace his property into the hands of B then he is entitled to its return.
Joyce J
[1903] 2 Ch 356
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Allen and Another v Rochdale Borough Council CA 23-Mar-1999
Land was sold. It had been used as playing fields. The freehold and leasehold interests in the land were held by the respondent, and the claimants asserted it was held as bare trustees for them as charitable trustees for the school foundation. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Equity
Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.187407
