Freed & Anor v Saffron Management Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1919 (Ch) (28 July 2023)

Freed & Anor v Saffron Management Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1919 (Ch) (28 July 2023)

The claimants may proceed against the trustee alone provided they amend their claim to avoid seeking relief that would override the settlor's power to appoint a new trustee, as the replacement beneficiaries are not necessary parties under CPR 19.10 and 64.4. The claimants' delay and procedural failures do not amount to abuse of process warranting strike-out. Permission is granted to serve notice of discontinuance out of jurisdiction, subject to amendment of the claim form and compliance with directions regarding notification and costs to the discontinued defendants.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1919 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Freddie Freed; Claimant: Minnie Freed; First Defendant: Saffron Management Limited; Second Defendant: Monika Freed; Third Defendant: Helena Cahová; Fourth Defendant: Marcela Lippold; Fifth Defendant: Radka Dušková; Sixth Defendant: Eliška Dušková
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Trust Dispute (interim Applications) / Interim Applications: Strike Out and Permission to Serve Notice of Discontinuance Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Conditional continuation; strike-out refused subject to amendment and service of discontinuance
Legal Topics
Breach of Trust, Beneficiary Rights, Trustee Removal, Procedural Rules for Service, Abuse of Process, Notice of Discontinuance
Trusts and Equity Civil Procedure Breach of Trust Beneficiary Rights Trustee Removal Procedural Rules for Service Abuse of Process Notice of Discontinuance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Freddie Freed

Claimant

Minnie Freed

Claimant

Saffron Management Limited

First Defendant

Monika Freed

Second Defendant

Helena Cahová

Third Defendant

Marcela Lippold

Fourth Defendant

Radka Dušková

Fifth Defendant

Eliška Dušková

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trust Dispute (interim Applications) / Interim Applications: Strike Out and Permission to Serve Notice of Discontinuance Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim should be struck out for failure to serve on necessary parties
  2. 2 Whether the claimants can proceed against the trustee alone
  3. 3 Whether the replacement beneficiaries and settlor are necessary parties

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants may proceed against the trustee alone provided they amend their claim to avoid seeking relief that would override the settlor's power to appoint a new trustee, as the replacement beneficiaries are not necessary parties under CPR 19.10 and 64.4. The claimants' delay and procedural failures do not amount to abuse of process warranting strike-out. Permission is granted to serve notice of discontinuance out of jurisdiction, subject to amendment of the claim form and compliance with directions regarding notification and costs to the discontinued defendants.

Court Disposition

Conditional continuation; strike-out refused subject to amendment and service of discontinuance

Orders

  • Claimants to amend claim form to remove relief affecting settlor's appointment power or seek alternative relief respecting settlor's interest
  • Claimants to serve notice of discontinuance on Second to Sixth Defendants out of jurisdiction within a court-fixed timeframe