Chopra v Bindra

Chopra v Bindra

Clause 1, when read with clause 4 and the deed as a whole, gave Akash and Angela joint lives interests in the house and its proceeds, with clause 4 operating as a valid remainder to the survivor if the house was unsold at death. Clause 4 was not void for repugnancy nor was it a testamentary disposition.

Parties
Appellant: Jennifer Margaret Chopra; Respondent: Angela Bindra
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Construction of Trust Deeds, Repugnancy in Trusts, Doctrine of Conversion, Testamentary Disposition, Cross Remainders

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jennifer Margaret Chopra

Appellant

Angela Bindra

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether clause 1 of the declaration of trust gave absolute interests in the proceeds of sale to the co-owners or only joint lives interests to be enlarged upon sale during joint lives
  2. 2 Whether clause 4, providing for the survivor to take the whole upon death before sale, is void as repugnant to clause 1 or a valid remainder
  3. 3 Whether clause 4 is a void testamentary disposition for want of compliance with statutory formalities

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 1, when read with clause 4 and the deed as a whole, gave Akash and Angela joint lives interests in the house and its proceeds, with clause 4 operating as a valid remainder to the survivor if the house was unsold at death. Clause 4 was not void for repugnancy nor was it a testamentary disposition.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration that the survivor (Angela Bindra) is entitled to the whole proceeds of sale absolutely under clause 4 of the deed.