Lawie v Lawie & Ors

Lawie v Lawie & Ors

Convincing proof exists that the settlors intended the trust to benefit both their children and grandchildren. The omission of the children's names was a drafting mistake. The trustees are unanimous in not opposing rectification, and the court exercises its discretion to rectify the trust deed.

Parties
Claimant: Sydney Lawie; Defendant: Anthony Paul Lawie; Defendant: Lesley Patricia Ely; Defendant: Roger Benjamin Ely; Defendant: Rebecca Annabel Lawie; Defendant: Jamie Paul Lawie
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
application for rectification granted
Legal Topics
Rectification of Trust Deed, Discretionary Trusts, Mistake in Legal Documents

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sydney Lawie

Claimant

Anthony Paul Lawie

Defendant

Lesley Patricia Ely

Defendant

Roger Benjamin Ely

Defendant

Rebecca Annabel Lawie

Defendant

Jamie Paul Lawie

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the trust deed should be rectified to include the settlor's children as potential beneficiaries
  2. 2 Whether convincing proof exists that the executed trust deed does not reflect the settlors' true intention

Ratio Decidendi

Convincing proof exists that the settlors intended the trust to benefit both their children and grandchildren. The omission of the children's names was a drafting mistake. The trustees are unanimous in not opposing rectification, and the court exercises its discretion to rectify the trust deed.

Court Disposition

application for rectification granted

Orders

  • Trust deed rectified to include the settlor's children, Anthony and Lesley, as potential beneficiaries.