Lea Lilly Perry and another v Lopag Trust Reg and another No 2 (Cayman Islands)

Lea Lilly Perry and another v Lopag Trust Reg and another No 2 (Cayman Islands)

The Board found no exceptional circumstances to justify disturbing concurrent findings of fact by the trial judge and Court of Appeal regarding Israeli matrimonial property law and Liechtenstein trust law. The findings depended on expert evidence and fact-sensitive assessments, placing them at the end of the spectrum where the Board's practice applies. The appeal to reconsider Pitt v Holt was procedurally barred and factually unsupported.

Parties
Appellant: Lea Lilly Perry; Appellant: Tamar Perry; Respondent: Lopag Trust Reg; Respondent: Admintrust Verwaltungsanstalt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Concurrent Findings of Fact, Foreign Law, Matrimonial Property, Equitable Mistake, Trustee Obligations
Trusts and Estates Family Law Conflict of Laws Concurrent Findings of Fact Foreign Law Matrimonial Property Equitable Mistake Trustee Obligations

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 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lea Lilly Perry

Appellant

Tamar Perry

Appellant

Lopag Trust Reg

Respondent

Admintrust Verwaltungsanstalt

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify disturbing concurrent findings of fact
  2. 2 Treatment of findings of fact in relation to foreign law
  3. 3 Validity of share transfer under Israeli matrimonial property law

Ratio Decidendi

The Board found no exceptional circumstances to justify disturbing concurrent findings of fact by the trial judge and Court of Appeal regarding Israeli matrimonial property law and Liechtenstein trust law. The findings depended on expert evidence and fact-sensitive assessments, placing them at the end of the spectrum where the Board's practice applies. The appeal to reconsider Pitt v Holt was procedurally barred and factually unsupported.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs specified.