FMA v BBA & Anor [2026] EWHC 995 (Ch) (27 February 2026)

FMA v BBA & Anor [2026] EWHC 995 (Ch) (27 February 2026)

BBA is the successful party; FMA had no good reason to bring proceedings; BBA's actions were in line with her parental responsibility and did not amount to breach of trust; FMA's costs were incurred in his own interests, not the trust's, and he is not entitled to indemnity; BBA's costs (except those relating to Penn Trust) are to be paid by FMA, with any shortfall to be paid from the trust estate.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 995 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: FMA; First Defendant: BBA; Second Defendant: FTA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Trust Litigation (removal of Trustee, Costs) / Post Compromise, Costs Determination
Outcome
FMA ordered to pay BBA's costs of the trust proceedings (excluding costs relating to Penn Trust); FMA not entitled to indemnity from the trust for his costs; BBA entitled to indemnity from the trust for any shortfall in costs not recovered from FMA; no order for indemnity costs.
Legal Topics
Removal of Trustee, Costs Following Compromise, Trustee Indemnity, Bare Trust for Minor, Parental Responsibility, Misappropriation Allegations
Trusts and Estates Property Law Civil Procedure Removal of Trustee Costs Following Compromise Trustee Indemnity Bare Trust for Minor Parental Responsibility +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FMA

Claimant

BBA

First Defendant

FTA

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trust Litigation (removal of Trustee, Costs) / Post Compromise, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded and to whom following compromise in trust proceedings
  2. 2 Whether FMA is entitled to indemnity from the trust for his costs
  3. 3 Whether BBA's conduct justified her removal as trustee or a costs order against her

Ratio Decidendi

BBA is the successful party; FMA had no good reason to bring proceedings; BBA's actions were in line with her parental responsibility and did not amount to breach of trust; FMA's costs were incurred in his own interests, not the trust's, and he is not entitled to indemnity; BBA's costs (except those relating to Penn Trust) are to be paid by FMA, with any shortfall to be paid from the trust estate.

Court Disposition

FMA ordered to pay BBA's costs of the trust proceedings (excluding costs relating to Penn Trust); FMA not entitled to indemnity from the trust for his costs; BBA entitled to indemnity from the trust for any shortfall in costs not recovered from FMA; no order for indemnity costs.

Orders

  • FMA to pay BBA's costs of the trust proceedings, excluding costs relating to Penn Trust.
  • BBA's unrecovered costs to be paid from the trust estate.