Duke of Somerset v Fitzgerald & Ors

Duke of Somerset v Fitzgerald & Ors

The arrangement constitutes a variation, not a resettlement, as the substratum and dynastic nature of the Settlement remain unchanged. The arrangement is for the benefit of unborn and unascertained beneficiaries, enlarges trustee powers, modernises the trust, and avoids significant tax liabilities. The court has jurisdiction under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958 to approve the arrangement without supplemental orders under the Settled Land Act 1925 or Trustee Act 1925.

Parties
Claimant: John Michael Edward, Duke of Somerset DL; First Defendant: Peter Robin Fitzgerald; Second Defendant: John Samuel Christopher Eidinow; Third Defendant: Judith-Rose Duchess of Somerset; Fourth Defendant: Sebastian Edward Lord Seymour; Fifth Defendant: Lord Charles Thomas George Seymour; Sixth Defendant: Lady Sophia Rose Seymour; Seventh Defendant: Lady Henrietta Charlotte Seymour; Eighth Defendant: Francis Charles Edward Lord Francis Seymour; Ninth Defendant: Patricia Lady Francis Seymour; Tenth Defendant: Webb Edward Percy Seymour; Eleventh Defendant: Poppy Hermione Alexandra Seymour; Twelfth Defendant: Leonora Hermione Jane Seymour; Thirteenth Defendant: Hermione Anne Tara Seymour; Fourteenth Defendant: Anne Francis Mary Lady Anne Seymour
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Trust Variation Application / Judgment on Application for Approval of Arrangement
Outcome
Application approved
Legal Topics
Variation of Trusts, Settled Land Act, Inheritance Tax, Perpetuities, Trustee Powers, Heritage Maintenance Fund, Same Sex Spouses and Civil Partners
Trusts and Estates Property Law Variation of Trusts Settled Land Act Inheritance Tax Perpetuities Trustee Powers Heritage Maintenance Fund +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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Michael Edward, Duke of Somerset DL

Claimant

Peter Robin Fitzgerald

First Defendant

John Samuel Christopher Eidinow

Second Defendant

Judith-Rose Duchess of Somerset

Third Defendant

Sebastian Edward Lord Seymour

Fourth Defendant

Lord Charles Thomas George Seymour

Fifth Defendant

Lady Sophia Rose Seymour

Sixth Defendant

Lady Henrietta Charlotte Seymour

Seventh Defendant

Francis Charles Edward Lord Francis Seymour

Eighth Defendant

Patricia Lady Francis Seymour

Ninth Defendant

Webb Edward Percy Seymour

Tenth Defendant

Poppy Hermione Alexandra Seymour

Eleventh Defendant

Leonora Hermione Jane Seymour

Twelfth Defendant

Hermione Anne Tara Seymour

Thirteenth Defendant

Anne Francis Mary Lady Anne Seymour

Fourteenth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trust Variation Application / Judgment on Application for Approval of Arrangement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed arrangement constitutes a variation or a resettlement of the Settlement
  2. 2 Whether the arrangement is for the benefit of unborn and unascertained beneficiaries
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958 to approve restriction or enlargement of trustee powers

Ratio Decidendi

The arrangement constitutes a variation, not a resettlement, as the substratum and dynastic nature of the Settlement remain unchanged. The arrangement is for the benefit of unborn and unascertained beneficiaries, enlarges trustee powers, modernises the trust, and avoids significant tax liabilities. The court has jurisdiction under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958 to approve the arrangement without supplemental orders under the Settled Land Act 1925 or Trustee Act 1925.

Court Disposition

Application approved

Orders

  • Arrangement varying the Settlement approved under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958
  • No supplemental application required under s.64 Settled Land Act 1925 or s.57 Trustee Act 1925