Henchley & Ors v Thompson [2017] EWHC 225 (Ch) (16 February 2017)

Henchley & Ors v Thompson [2017] EWHC 225 (Ch) (16 February 2017)

The court has discretion whether to order an account in common form against a trustee or de facto trustee. Although the duty to account is fundamental, the court will not always order an account, especially where it would be pointless or oppressive. In this case, for The Henchley Trust, the Defendant cannot provide meaningful information and the only asset is preserved, so no order is made. For The Childrens' Trust, the Defendant has not discharged his duty to account, and the interests of future beneficiaries require an account to be provided, so an order is made.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 225 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Claire Henchley; Claimant: Elizabeth Anne Baxendale; Claimant: Vivien Mash; Claimant: Natasha Jade Khambhaita; Claimant: Tori Brittany Khambhaita; Claimant: Charles Martin Mash; Claimant: Nicholas John Mash; Claimant: James Henchley Mash; Claimant: Caroline Elizabeth Beddall; Defendant: David Brian Thompson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Trusts—beneficiary Application for Account / Judgment on Application for Order for Account in Common Form
Outcome
Order for account in common form made against Defendant in respect of The Childrens' Trust; application for account in respect of The Henchley Trust refused.
Legal Topics
Trustee Duties, Beneficiary Rights, Limitation of Actions, Laches, Trust Accounts, Discretionary Remedies
Trusts and Equity Trustee Duties Beneficiary Rights Limitation of Actions Laches Trust Accounts Discretionary Remedies

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 18
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claire Henchley

Claimant

Elizabeth Anne Baxendale

Claimant

Vivien Mash

Claimant

Natasha Jade Khambhaita

Claimant

Tori Brittany Khambhaita

Claimant

Charles Martin Mash

Claimant

Nicholas John Mash

Claimant

James Henchley Mash

Claimant

Caroline Elizabeth Beddall

Claimant

David Brian Thompson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trusts—beneficiary Application for Account / Judgment on Application for Order for Account in Common Form

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court must order an account from a trustee or de facto trustee where no adequate account has been provided
  2. 2 Whether the court has discretion to refuse an order for an account in common form
  3. 3 Whether limitation or laches bars the claim for an account

Ratio Decidendi

The court has discretion whether to order an account in common form against a trustee or de facto trustee. Although the duty to account is fundamental, the court will not always order an account, especially where it would be pointless or oppressive. In this case, for The Henchley Trust, the Defendant cannot provide meaningful information and the only asset is preserved, so no order is made. For The Childrens' Trust, the Defendant has not discharged his duty to account, and the interests of future beneficiaries require an account to be provided, so an order is made.

Court Disposition

Order for account in common form made against Defendant in respect of The Childrens' Trust; application for account in respect of The Henchley Trust refused.

Orders

  • Defendant to provide an account in common form for The Childrens' Trust to the Claimants.
  • No order for account in respect of The Henchley Trust.