White & Ors v Williams & Ors
The Bibleway Trustees are not entitled to indemnity from the Lewisham, Bethnal Green, and Mitcham Buildings for liabilities incurred, including the Abrahams loan, because those liabilities arose from breaches of trust and improper conflation of trust and Cambridge Congregation affairs. The charging order in favour of Mr Abrahams is refused because the equities favour the congregations who would be unfairly prejudiced, and the loan was made and incurred in breach of trust. Cy-près schemes for transfer of the buildings to the respective congregations are approved, with terms reflecting the spirit of the original gifts.
- Parties
- Claimant: Michael White; Claimant: Monica Knight; Claimant: Claudette Brown; Claimant: Genie White; Claimant: Yvonne Palmer; Claimant: Michael Clarke; Defendant: Lynwal Williams; Defendant: Kay Duncan; Defendant: David Ogunlana; Defendant: Leon Williams; Defendant: HM Attorney General; Defendant: Harold C McFarlane; Defendant: Clinton P McFarlane; Defendant: Selwyn L Forte; Defendant: Jennifer Elevique; Defendant: Diana N Jacobs; Defendant: Beverley Carter-Allen; Defendant: Rita Bailey; Defendant: Euston Copeland; Defendant: Sandra Copeland; Claimant (county Court) / Applicant (charging Order): Alistair Abrahams
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 10 March 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil (charity/trusts) / Final Judgment After Trial and Combined Hearing of Cy Près and Charging Order Proceedings
- Outcome
- Bibleway Trustees' indemnity claim dismissed in entirety; Mr Abrahams' application for a final charging order refused; cy-près schemes for transfer of church buildings approved.
- Legal Topics
- Cy Près Schemes, Trustee Indemnity, Breach of Trust, Charging Orders, Charitable Property, Trustee Duties
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Michael White
Claimant
Monica Knight
Claimant
Claudette Brown
Claimant
Genie White
Claimant
Yvonne Palmer
Claimant
Michael Clarke
Claimant
Lynwal Williams
Defendant
Kay Duncan
Defendant
David Ogunlana
Defendant
Leon Williams
Defendant
HM Attorney General
Defendant
Harold C McFarlane
Defendant
Clinton P McFarlane
Defendant
Selwyn L Forte
Defendant
Jennifer Elevique
Defendant
Diana N Jacobs
Defendant
Beverley Carter-Allen
Defendant
Rita Bailey
Defendant
Euston Copeland
Defendant
Sandra Copeland
Defendant
Alistair Abrahams
Claimant (county Court) / Applicant (charging Order)
Procedural Posture
Civil (charity/trusts) / Final Judgment After Trial and Combined Hearing of Cy Près and Charging Order Proceedings
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Bibleway Trustees are entitled to indemnity from trust assets for liabilities incurred
- 2 Whether Mr Abrahams is entitled to a final charging order over the Lewisham Building
- 3 Whether Bibleway Trustees committed breaches of trust precluding indemnity
Ratio Decidendi
The Bibleway Trustees are not entitled to indemnity from the Lewisham, Bethnal Green, and Mitcham Buildings for liabilities incurred, including the Abrahams loan, because those liabilities arose from breaches of trust and improper conflation of trust and Cambridge Congregation affairs. The charging order in favour of Mr Abrahams is refused because the equities favour the congregations who would be unfairly prejudiced, and the loan was made and incurred in breach of trust. Cy-près schemes for transfer of the buildings to the respective congregations are approved, with terms reflecting the spirit of the original gifts.
Court Disposition
Bibleway Trustees' indemnity claim dismissed in entirety; Mr Abrahams' application for a final charging order refused; cy-près schemes for transfer of church buildings approved.
Orders
- Bibleway Trustees' indemnity claim dismissed.
- Interim charging order set aside; no final charging order granted to Mr Abrahams.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment