London Borough of Brent v Johnson & Ors

London Borough of Brent v Johnson & Ors

Brent is the sole legal and beneficial owner of Bridge Park. No resulting trust, constructive trust, proprietary estoppel, promissory estoppel, estoppel by convention, or charitable trust exists in favour of HPCC or the Defendants. The Defendants lack standing to apply for a restriction as HPCC, an unincorporated association, cannot hold a beneficial interest, and SCT cannot acquire such interest by assignment. The acquisition and subsequent management arrangements do not evidence an intention to create a trust, and the property is held for Brent's statutory purposes.

Parties
Claimant: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Brent; First Defendant: Leonard Johnson; Second Defendant: Stonebridge Community Trust (HPCC) Limited; Third Defendant: Her Majesty's Attorney-General
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Declaration granted that Brent is sole legal and beneficial owner; injunction granted restraining Defendants from applying to register any restriction.
Legal Topics
Resulting Trusts, Constructive Trusts, Proprietary Estoppel, Charitable Trusts, Standing, Land Registration, Local Government Powers
Property Law Trusts Law Charity Law Resulting Trusts Constructive Trusts Proprietary Estoppel Charitable Trusts Standing +2 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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Brent

Claimant

Leonard Johnson

First Defendant

Stonebridge Community Trust (HPCC) Limited

Second Defendant

Her Majesty's Attorney-General

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the London Borough of Brent holds Bridge Park on trust for HPCC or the community
  2. 2 Whether a resulting trust, constructive trust, proprietary estoppel, promissory estoppel, estoppel by convention, or charitable trust exists over Bridge Park
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants have standing to apply for a restriction on the registered title

Ratio Decidendi

Brent is the sole legal and beneficial owner of Bridge Park. No resulting trust, constructive trust, proprietary estoppel, promissory estoppel, estoppel by convention, or charitable trust exists in favour of HPCC or the Defendants. The Defendants lack standing to apply for a restriction as HPCC, an unincorporated association, cannot hold a beneficial interest, and SCT cannot acquire such interest by assignment. The acquisition and subsequent management arrangements do not evidence an intention to create a trust, and the property is held for Brent's statutory purposes.

Court Disposition

Declaration granted that Brent is sole legal and beneficial owner; injunction granted restraining Defendants from applying to register any restriction.

Orders

  • Declaration that Brent is sole legal and beneficial owner of Bridge Park.
  • Injunction restraining Defendants from making any application to register a restriction against the Property.