London Borough of Brent v Johnson

London Borough of Brent v Johnson

The appeal is allowed because it would not be right to strike out the charitable trust argument without knowing the Attorney General's stance. If the Attorney General wishes to take a neutral stance, joining as a defendant is appropriate to bind the outcome. If the Attorney General opposes the existence of the charitable trust, the argument must be struck out, following Re Belling. The appellants have sufficient interest to argue the point if the Attorney General is joined neutrally.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Brent; Defendant/appellant: Leonard Johnson; Defendant/appellant: Stonebridge Community Trust (HPCC) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Orders of Deputy Master Rhys (21 March 2019) and Master Clark (13 September 2019)
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Charitable Trusts, Standing, Joinder of Parties, Strike Out Applications
Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Charitable Trusts Standing Joinder of Parties Strike Out Applications

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Brent

Claimant/respondent

Leonard Johnson

Defendant/appellant

Stonebridge Community Trust (HPCC) Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Orders of Deputy Master Rhys (21 March 2019) and Master Clark (13 September 2019)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Attorney General is a necessary party to proceedings asserting the existence of a charitable trust against a property owner
  2. 2 Whether the appellants have standing to argue the existence of a charitable trust in the absence of the Attorney General
  3. 3 Proper procedural response when the Attorney General declines to join proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed because it would not be right to strike out the charitable trust argument without knowing the Attorney General's stance. If the Attorney General wishes to take a neutral stance, joining as a defendant is appropriate to bind the outcome. If the Attorney General opposes the existence of the charitable trust, the argument must be struck out, following Re Belling. The appellants have sufficient interest to argue the point if the Attorney General is joined neutrally.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The court is minded to join the Attorney General as a defendant.