AB v CD & Ors [2019] EWHC 2323 (Ch) (17 July 2019)

AB v CD & Ors [2019] EWHC 2323 (Ch) (17 July 2019)

The trustees failed to act impartially and properly consider all relevant matters in the proposed division of trust assets, particularly regarding the inclusion of the M Fund and the treatment of the eighth and ninth defendants. The court declined to impose the claimant's solution but directed the trustees to reconsider the division in light of fiduciary duties and the court's guidance, with the possibility of court intervention if deadlock persists.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2323 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: AB; First Defendant: CD; Second Defendant: EF; Third Defendant: GD; Fourth Defendant: HD; Fifth Defendant: ID; Sixth Defendant: JD; Seventh Defendant: KD; Eighth Defendant: LM; Ninth Defendant: NM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Trusts—directions Application / Judgment After Contested Hearing
Outcome
Directions given; trustees to reconsider division of trust assets in accordance with fiduciary duties and court guidance; further court intervention if deadlock persists.
Legal Topics
Trustee Duties, Winding Up of Trusts, Letters of Wishes, Discretionary Trusts, Division of Trust Assets, Judicial Intervention in Trustee Deadlock
Trusts and Estates Equity Trustee Duties Winding Up of Trusts Letters of Wishes Discretionary Trusts Division of Trust Assets Judicial Intervention in Trustee Deadlock

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB

Claimant

CD

First Defendant

EF

Second Defendant

GD

Third Defendant

HD

Fourth Defendant

ID

Fifth Defendant

JD

Sixth Defendant

KD

Seventh Defendant

LM

Eighth Defendant

NM

Ninth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trusts—directions Application / Judgment After Contested Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trustees should include the M Fund in the division of the Will Trust discretionary fund
  2. 2 Whether the trustees should override the letter of wishes to achieve equality between family branches
  3. 3 Whether the court should intervene in the trustees' deadlock and direct the manner of winding up the trusts

Ratio Decidendi

The trustees failed to act impartially and properly consider all relevant matters in the proposed division of trust assets, particularly regarding the inclusion of the M Fund and the treatment of the eighth and ninth defendants. The court declined to impose the claimant's solution but directed the trustees to reconsider the division in light of fiduciary duties and the court's guidance, with the possibility of court intervention if deadlock persists.

Court Disposition

Directions given; trustees to reconsider division of trust assets in accordance with fiduciary duties and court guidance; further court intervention if deadlock persists.

Orders

  • Trustees directed to reconsider the division of the Will Trust discretionary fund and the inclusion of the M Fund, taking into account fiduciary duties and the court's guidance.
  • If trustees cannot agree, the matter will return to court for a decision.