swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Trusts - From: 2003 To: 2003
This page lists 17 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Hulbert and Others v Avens and Another Times, 07 February 2003
30 Jan 2003
ChD
Richard Seymour QC, J
Damages, Trusts, Equity
The claimant sought damages for breach of trust against the defendant solicitors, who had acted as trustees under deeds of trust. They claimed for losses incurred by way of penalties for the late payment of capital gains tax. The defendants said that there should be offset the sums earned by the unpaid tax by way of interest. Held: Whether a breach of trust had occurred was to be decided as at the date of the alleged acts constituting the breach, but the damages fell to be caculated with respect to the situation as at the date of the hearing. Accordingly the sums received could be set off. Courts of equity did not award damages, but ordered restitution.
1 Cites
CIBC Mellon Trust Company and Others v Stolzenberg and Others [2003] EWHC 13 (Ch)
3 Feb 2003
ChD
Etherton J
Trusts
Application to set aside judgments entered on failure to comply with 'unless' orders. Held: Etherton J said: "The Court of Appeal has laid down guidance as to the approach of the Court when considering an application for relief from sanctions within CPR r.3.9. The Court, in such a case, must consider each of the nine items listed in r.3.9(1) which are relevant to the case, carrying out the necessary balancing exercise methodically, and explaining how the ultimate decision has been reached: Woodhouse v Consignia [2002] EWCA Civ 275, [2002] 1 WLR 2558. The Court must bear in mind that, where the effect of the sanction is to preclude a trial on the merits, the effect is to deprive the applicant of access to the Court, a concept which now has a particular resonance under article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998 ("Article 6"): ibid at para. [42]. The Court, in carrying out the balancing exercise, is not, however, limited to the nine items specified in r.3.9. That rule expressly requires the Court to consider all the circumstances. In an appropriate case, for example, the Court can and should consider the merits, as part of the circumstances: Chapple v Emmett (unreptd) (CA) 8th December 1999. The exercise of the discretion of the Court under CPR r.3.9 must be carried out against the background, and in the light of, the overriding objective to deal with cases justly, as set out in CPR r.1.1: ibid.; Arrow Nominees Inc. v Blackledge [2002] 2 BCLC 167, esp. at paras.54-55 (Chadwick LJ) and 70 and 72 (Ward LJ)."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Abacus Trust Company (Isle of Man) Colyb Limited v Barr, Barr, and Barr; ChD 6-Feb-2003 - [2003] EWHC 114 (Ch); Gazette, 03 April 2003; [2003] WTLR 149; [2003] 2 WLR 1362; [2003] 1 All ER 763; [2003] Ch 409
Pozzuto, Di Iulio v Iacovides [2003] EWHC 431 (Ch)
7 Mar 2003
ChD
Mr Justice Lawrence Collins
Land, Insolvency, Trusts
[ Bailii ]
Vadim Schmidt v Rosewood Trust Limited Times, 29 March 2003; [2003] UKPC 26; Gazette, 05 June 2003; [2003] 2 AC 709; (2002-03) 5 ITELR 715; [2003] 3 All ER 76; [2003] 2 WLR 1442; [2003] Pens LR 145; [2003] WTLR 565
27 Mar 2003
PC
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Commonwealth, Trusts, Equity
PC (Isle of Man) The petitioner sought disclosure of trust documents, as a beneficiary. Disclosure had been refused as he had not been a named beneficiary. Held: Times had moved on, and trust documents had taken more and more indirect ways of conferring benefits. The settlements were badly drafted, but that should not be used to excuse a court fulfilling its duties. The right to seek disclosure did not depend upon a fixed and transmissible beneficial interest. The object of a discretion may have similar rights, and the right was not dependant upon establishing a proprietary interest, but the remedy would be in equity and subject to the court's discretion. A beneficiary of a discretionary trust has a non-assignable and non-transmissible interest in the trust, and has no entitlement as of right to any trust documents or other information relating to the trust in the possession or control of the trustees.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
Lissimore v Downing [2003] EWHC B1 (Ch); [2003] 2 FLR 308; [2003] Fam Law 566
31 Mar 2003
ChD
Norris QC J
Trusts, Estoppel
The claimant asserted an estoppel in land registered in the name of the defendant. Held: Unspecific statements made by the defendant that "she would never want for anything", or that "he would take care of her", or that "he had looked after his other girlfriends and she would not be different" did not found a proprietary estoppel: "Such statements do not on their face relate to any specific property, they plainly do not amount to a representation which binds the whole of Mr Downing's property, and they are not expressed in terms which enable any objective assessment to be made of what is being promised. In this last respect they are to be contrasted with statements made to unpaid or underpaid workers or business partners, encouraged to work on because they would be 'treated right', and for whom a commensurate reward could be objectively assessed."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
West and Others (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Trennery and others Times, 18 April 2003; Gazette, 12 June 2003; [2003] STC 580; [2003] EWHC 676 (Ch)
1 Apr 2003
ChD
The Honourable Mr Justice Peter Smith
Capital Gains Tax, Trusts
The taxpayers had adopted the 'flip-flop' scheme to reduce their Capital Gains Tax liability. Held: The section was intended to prevent relief where the settlor retained some direct or indirect benefit. Derived property was defined to include income from settled property, and that could include property outside the settlement if there was also property within the settlement of which it could be said to represent the proceeds. Loans in this scheme were indirectly derived form the utilisation of the shares within the settlement, and the scheme failed.
Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 77
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Somerset-Leeke and Another v Kay Trustees and Another; ChD 1-May-2003 - [2003] EWHC 1243 (Ch); [2004] 3 All ER 406
Fraser and Another v Canterbury Diocesan Board of Finance and Another [2003] EWHC 1075 (Ch)
14 May 2003
Chd
The Honourable Mr Justice Lewison
Land, Trusts
The claimants sought to assert that land acquired under the 1841 Act reverted to them on its ceasing to be used for the purposes of a school. Lewison J summarised the evidence: "An analysis of the school registers for 1931 to 1947 shows that the children came from a variety of housing stock. Some came from what were, historically, middle-class streets of owner-occupied houses. Mr Harris lived in one such street, and his father, who worked for the local electricity board, owned his own house. An examination of the Maidstone rate-books for this period shows that some of the children lived in houses with high rateable values. I was shown photographs of some of these houses which were plainly comfortable and relatively spacious houses. However, further analysis by Mr Neil Fraser demonstrated that many of the higher rated houses appeared to have been in multiple occupation and others of them may well have been highly rated because the hereditament also included a shop. In the case of those children who lived in hereditaments including a shop, they may have been the children of 'tradesmen', who were specifically mentioned in the 1851 Act, but not in the conveyance.
Mr Harris said in his evidence that the former parish of St Philip contains a variety of housing including premises which belonged to the local authority and premises in and around Stone Street, Maidstone which would certainly have been occupied by the poorer classes. He, however, lived in a 'better class area', as did a friend of his, who also attended St Philip's and was the son of a police inspector. He concluded that, having looked at the register, there were clearly a mixed variety of pupils being admitted to the school, some from very obviously poor backgrounds but some clearly from a more wealthy area." The defendants argued that the trustees of the school had used the land for purposes outside the terms of the original trusts, and that they acquired a title outside the Act, which title was the one acquired by them. Held: "If land is conveyed to be held on trust for purpose A and for no other purpose, and the trustees use the land for purpose A and also for purpose B, it seems to me that they are using it for two purposes, one of which is permitted by the trust and the other of which is not. What they have not done is to cease to use the land for purpose A merely because they are also using it for purpose B."
School Sites Act 1841
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
White v White [2003] EWCA Civ 924
19 May 2003
CA
Lord Justice Thorpe, Lady Justice Arden, Mr Justice Bodey
Family, Trusts, Children, Land
The parties to the marriage owned a property which they had extended. The relationship deteriorated, and the mother sought an order under the 1996 Act. The mother left the home, and the father cared for the children. He sought orders under the 1989 Act for the transfer of the property. Those proceedings were made subject to the current proceedings. Held: Sensible case management demands that competing applications be conjoined. The current order was wrong in principle. When the court looked at the intentions of the parties under a trust, it should look to the time before the trust, not from time to time later. The powers under each Act are not co-extensive. Unless for some special reason the application should be under both Acts and the exercise of the powers under each Act should be considered by the same court and at the same time.
Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 14 - Children Act 1989 Sch1
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Pratt and Another v Medwin and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 906
18 Jun 2003
CA
Trusts
[ Bailii ]
Hyett v Stanley and others [2003] EWCA Civ 942; [2004] 1 FLR 394
20 Jun 2003
CA
Trusts, Wills and Probate, Land
The couple had lived together at the property without being married for several years. The house was held in the man's sole name, and after his death she sought a half share in it. It was established that she had been told she should have a half share in the house during his life, and that she had accepted obligations to the bank on the strength of that promise. The executors contended that it has been intended only that she should acquire an interest which would persist during his lifetime. Held: Mr Freeman and Miss Hyett rendered themselves jointly and severally liable to the Bank by the very transaction by which Miss Hyett acquired her beneficial interest, they could only reasonably have intended that they should each take a half share. A life insurance policy on joint lives was held for Mrs Hyett only to the extent required to repay the charge, but as to the rest for the executors.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
DEG-Deutsche Investitions und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH v Koshy and Other (No 3); Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (in receivership) v Same (No 3); CA 28-Jul-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1048; Times, 09 September 2003; [2004] 1 BCLC 131
Vajpeyi v Yijsaf [2003] EWHC 2339 (Ch)
19 Sep 2003
ChD
Prescott QC
Trusts
[ Bailii ]
Vajpeyi v Yusaf [2003] EWHC 2788 (Ch)
19 Sep 2003
ChD
Trusts
[ Bailii ]
Smalley v Bracken Partners Ltd and Another; CA 19-Dec-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1875
Smalley v Bracken Partners Limited and Eye Group Limited; CA 19-Dec-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1875