Freddie Freed & Anor v Saffron Management Limited & Ors

Freddie Freed & Anor v Saffron Management Limited & Ors

The claimants may proceed against the Trustee alone if they amend their claim to remove relief that would affect the Settlor's power to appoint trustees, as the Replacement Beneficiaries are not necessary parties under CPR 19.10 and 64.4. The Second Defendant (Settlor) is a necessary party only if the relief sought would override her Settlor's Interest in appointing trustees. The claimants' delay and procedural missteps do not amount to an abuse of process warranting striking out; the appropriate remedy is to allow amendment and discontinuance, subject to conditions and costs.

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
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Trust Litigation (interim Applications) / Interim Applications—application to Strike Out and Application for Permission to Serve Notice of Discontinuance Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Conditional permission to proceed—subject to amendment and service of discontinuance; otherwise, claim to be struck out
Legal Topics
Breach of Trust, Trustee Removal, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Necessary and Proper Parties, Abuse of Process, Discontinuance of Claim
Trusts Civil Procedure Breach of Trust Trustee Removal Service Out of Jurisdiction Necessary and Proper Parties Abuse of Process Discontinuance of Claim

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 4 Authorities cited 18 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 Litigation (interim Applications) / Interim Applications—application to Strike Out and Application for 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 within time
  2. 2 Whether the claimants can proceed against the trustee alone after discontinuing against other defendants
  3. 3 Whether the claimants' conduct amounted to an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants may proceed against the Trustee alone if they amend their claim to remove relief that would affect the Settlor's power to appoint trustees, as the Replacement Beneficiaries are not necessary parties under CPR 19.10 and 64.4. The Second Defendant (Settlor) is a necessary party only if the relief sought would override her Settlor's Interest in appointing trustees. The claimants' delay and procedural missteps do not amount to an abuse of process warranting striking out; the appropriate remedy is to allow amendment and discontinuance, subject to conditions and costs.

Court Disposition

Conditional permission to proceed—subject to amendment and service of discontinuance; otherwise, claim to be struck out

Orders

  • Claimants to apply to amend the claim form to remove relief affecting Settlor's appointment power or otherwise respect Settlor's Interest
  • Claimants to serve Notices of Discontinuance on Second to Sixth Defendants out of jurisdiction, with explanatory documents and cost information