Coutts & Co & Anor v Ludlow Trust Company Ltd [2023] EWHC 2545 (Ch) (17 October 2023)

It is expedient to appoint Ludlow as trustee in substitution for Coutts, and it is impracticable to do so without the court's assistance because the beneficiary is a minor and the trust instrument requires court consent. The court is satisfied as to Ludlow's suitability and the appropriateness of the transfer.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2023] EWHC 2545 (Ch)
Parties: Claimant: Coutts & Co; Claimant: TEFG; Defendant: Ludlow Trust Company Limited
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 17 October 2023
Procedural Posture: Part 8 Claim (uncontentious Trust Administration) / Judgment on Application for Substitution of Trustee
Outcome: Application granted
Legal Topics: Substitution of Trustee, Trustee Act 1925 S.41, Trust Administration, Minor Beneficiary, Anonymity Order

Trusts Property Law Substitution of Trustee Trustee Act 1925 S.41 Trust Administration Minor Beneficiary Anonymity Order

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2

Parties

Coutts & Co

Claimant

TEFG

Claimant

Ludlow Trust Company Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (uncontentious Trust Administration) / Judgment on Application for Substitution of Trustee

Legal Issues

1 Whether it is expedient to appoint Ludlow Trust Company Limited as trustee in substitution for Coutts & Co under s.41(1) Trustee Act 1925
2 Whether it is inexpedient, difficult or impracticable to effect the change of trustee without the assistance of the court

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

Ludlow Trust Company Limited appointed as trustee in substitution for Coutts & Co under s.41(1) Trustee Act 1925
Consequential vesting provisions to transfer trust property to new trustee

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.