Armstrong v Armstrong

The court found clear evidence that Mrs White intended the power of appointment in both trusts to last until the death of the last life assured, that her daughters were intended as default beneficiaries, and that the trust property was sufficiently identified. The court ordered rectification of the trusts to reflect these intentions and made a declaration as to the trust property.

Parties: Claimant: Catherine Armstrong; Defendant: Catherine Armstrong; Defendant: Elaine Sutherland
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 23 August 2019
Procedural Posture: Part 8 Claim (cpr) / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome: Claim allowed; rectification and declaratory relief granted
Legal Topics: Rectification of Trusts, Construction of Trust Documents, Declaratory Relief

Trusts Probate Property Law Rectification of Trusts Construction of Trust Documents Declaratory Relief

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Catherine Armstrong

Claimant

Catherine Armstrong

Defendant

Elaine Sutherland

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (cpr) / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether the 2005 and 2007 trusts should be rectified to correct errors and omissions in the trust documents
2 Whether declaratory relief should be granted to clarify the terms of the trusts
3 Whether the trust property and beneficiaries are sufficiently identified

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; rectification and declaratory relief granted

Orders

Declaration as to the policy held on the terms of the 2007 trust
Rectification of the 2007 trust to insert 'Catherine Armstrong 50% and Elaine Smith 50%' as default beneficiaries in Part 2 of the Trust Schedule