Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4

'Re Baden's Deed Trusts (No.2) [1973] Ch. 9'

Do not show me this again

Are you in the right place?

Jump to Law and see how teachers think you should prepare in:

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Case note: 'Re Baden's Deed Trusts (No.2) [1973] Ch. 9' The Court: > 'The Court of Appeal' The Judges: > Sachs, Megaw and Stamp LJJ What are the relevant facts? > 1941 - Bertram Baden (Settlor), Chairman and Managing Director of Matthew Hall & Co Ltd, established trust fund of 5,000 shares in the company for officers and employees of the company. > Clause 9(a) of the deed directed his trustees to: > "Apply the net income of the fund in making at their absolute discretion grants to or for the benefit of any of the officers and employees or ex-officers or ex-employees of the company or to any relatives or dependants of any such persons in such amounts at such times and on such conditions (if any) as they think fit..." > 1943 - Settlor transferred a further 5,000 shares to the trustees and other shares were added later. > 1960 - Settlor dies. > 1962 - Executors told that trusts were void for uncertainty and claimed payment of the fund to his estate. ...read more.

Middle

Result of Appeal by the Executors: The Judges: Sachs LJ: > Executors believe the words "relatives" and "dependants" imports such uncertainty that the trust as a whole is void. > Agrees with the test laid down by Lord Wilberforce in 'Re Gulbenkian's Settlements' - "can it be said with certainty that any given individual is or is not a member of the class?" > The suggestion that this trust could be invalid because it may be impossible to prove an individual was not in the relevant class is wholly incorrect. > Considers trustees capable of coming to a conclusion in any given case as to whether or not a particular candidate could properly be described as "dependant". > Agrees with Brightman J that "the use of the expression 'relatives' cannot clause the slightest difficulty. > Held: Appeal dismissed. Megaw LJ: > Disagrees with suggestion that the inclusion of "relatives" makes this trust so wide to be administratively unworkable. > Agrees with 'Gulbenkian's' test. ...read more.

Conclusion

> On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld this decision, but held that Goff J had used the incorrect test of validity - the correct test was used in 'Re Gulbenkian's Settlements' and so the case was given to the Chancery Division to consider the validity of the clause. > Executors appealed to the House of Lords who reversed the Court of Appeal decision stating that clause 9(a) was a trust and again remitted the case to the Chancery Division. > During this hearing, it was decided that the test in 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Broadway Cottages Trust [1955] Ch. 20' no longer applied and instead, the test mentioned earlier in 'Re Gulbenkian's Settlements' was to be utilised - accordingly, the clause was valid as a trust. > The executors' next appeal was dismissed using the above test. > As to the validity of a discretionary trust, you must distinguish between conceptual certainty and evidential difficulty - if an individual could not establish that he was a member, then he must not be a member. > There was no conceptual uncertainty regarding the words "dependants" or "relatives" and so the trust was valid. Word Count: 1,012 words 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Equity & Trust Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Equity & Trust Law essays

  1. Are trustees too powerful?

    above."15 In the case of Re Lucking's Will Trusts16 where it was held that the trustee was held liable under the "ordinary prudent man of business, as he had failed to supervise, and had the knowledge that the agent was dishonestly.

  2. Equity Case Summaries

    Stevens v Benning - benefit of contract involving a personal confidence - NB can assign wages - Public pay generally not as tied to propriety of position Arbuthnov v Norton (1846) - Bare right to litigate NOT assignable Trentex Trading Corp, - proceeds may be Clegg v Bromley - Need

  1. Constitution Of Trusts Problem Question - in order to decide whether Nixon is entitled ...

    Again here, there is no need to transfer the legal title, as Nixon is the sole owner of the collection of diamonds19 and it would be sufficient if he had effected a valid declaration. Therefore, as with the farm, constition of trusts will not be considered.

  2. The Development of Equity and Trusts

    Acts 1873-1875 have helped merge both equity and the common law, this approved equity and common law shall form together and to be run within one set court in order to produce a simpler and stronger legal system. The Judicature Acts 1873-1875 have created the modern legal system of England and Wales.

  1. Express Trusts

    As it seems, Brad wished to create an express trust, then he is required to comply with the Milroy v Lord2 test. This test stipulates that the subject matter of the trust is required to be transferred to the trustees, subject to a valid declaration of trust and in compliance with any statutory formalities.

  2. certainty of objects

    must have a definite object. There must be somebody, in whose favour the court can decree performance. Unquote The above rule has been followed by Ernst & Young v Central Guaranty Trust Co (No. 2) which has been restated by Harman J in Re Wood, who observed "that a gift on trust must have a cestui que trust".

  1. Charitable trusts, what gives them charitable status?

    Secondly that the purpose is beneficial to the community in a charitable way.6 1. Relief of poverty Trusts for the relief of poverty are exempt from the public benefit requirement. Poverty in this sense does not mean that of destitute or being penniless.

  2. The trustees’ duty to provide information to beneficiaries.

    TOPIC OF LECTURE Enough reminiscing of the past. I must now turn to the topic of this lecture, a topic of practical importance and some difficulty which has found (at least until recently) remarkably limited consideration in the authorities, text books and journals. Shortly before I was invited to give this lecture I was troubled as the trustee

  • Over 180,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work

Marked by a teacher

This essay has been marked by one of our great teachers. You can read the full teachers notes when you download the essay.

Peer reviewed

This essay has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay reviewing squad. Read the full review on the essay page.

Peer reviewed

This essay has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay reviewing squad. Read the full review under the essay preview on this page.

Do not show me this again

Are you in the right place?

Jump to Law and see how teachers think you should prepare in: