Grender & Ors v Dresden & Ors

Grender & Ors v Dresden & Ors

The term 'Estate Resident' under the 1963 Trust Deed includes any freehold proprietor of a plot abutting an estate road who has entered into a direct covenant with the Company to pay the due proportion of maintenance and is not in default. The Deed is valid and subsisting, the current Trustees are lawfully in office, and the court has power to direct how meetings and quorums are to be constituted to ensure the effective administration of the trust and company. The court exercises its jurisdiction to resolve deadlock and clarify the scheme's operation.

Parties
Claimant: Peter John William Grender; Claimant: Maundy Maureen Kathleen Todd; Claimant: Jan Wladimir Ledochowski; Claimant: Anne Gillian Briant; Claimant: Mark Allain Ross Grizzelle; Claimant: Robert Jeremy Allan; Claimant: Keith Edwards; Claimant: Coombe House Estate Residents’ Association Limited; Defendant: Michael Coleman Dresden; Defendant: Joan Margaret Dresden; Defendant: Edwin William Roberts (as Representative of Estate Residents of Coombe House Estate); Defendant: Harry Morris Michael Cullinan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Trust/chancery (construction of Deed and Trustee Directions) / Judgment After Hearing of Part 8 Claim for Directions and Construction
Outcome
Declarations and directions granted in favour of the Claimants; costs orders made as provisionally indicated.
Legal Topics
Construction of Trust Deed, Validity of Trusts, Trustee Powers and Directions, Quorum and Voting Under Trusts, Land Covenants, Company Shareholding in Trust Context
Trusts Property Law Company Law Construction of Trust Deed Validity of Trusts Trustee Powers and Directions Quorum and Voting Under Trusts Land Covenants +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter John William Grender

Claimant

Maundy Maureen Kathleen Todd

Claimant

Jan Wladimir Ledochowski

Claimant

Anne Gillian Briant

Claimant

Mark Allain Ross Grizzelle

Claimant

Robert Jeremy Allan

Claimant

Keith Edwards

Claimant

Coombe House Estate Residents’ Association Limited

Claimant

Michael Coleman Dresden

Defendant

Joan Margaret Dresden

Defendant

Edwin William Roberts (as Representative of Estate Residents of Coombe House Estate)

Defendant

Harry Morris Michael Cullinan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trust/chancery (construction of Deed and Trustee Directions) / Judgment After Hearing of Part 8 Claim for Directions and Construction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who qualifies as an 'Estate Resident' under the 1963 Trust Deed?
  2. 2 Are the current Trustees lawfully in office?
  3. 3 Is the Trust Deed legally valid and subsisting?

Ratio Decidendi

The term 'Estate Resident' under the 1963 Trust Deed includes any freehold proprietor of a plot abutting an estate road who has entered into a direct covenant with the Company to pay the due proportion of maintenance and is not in default. The Deed is valid and subsisting, the current Trustees are lawfully in office, and the court has power to direct how meetings and quorums are to be constituted to ensure the effective administration of the trust and company. The court exercises its jurisdiction to resolve deadlock and clarify the scheme's operation.

Court Disposition

Declarations and directions granted in favour of the Claimants; costs orders made as provisionally indicated.

Orders

  • Declaration that the current Trustees are lawfully in office and hold the shares as trustees.
  • Declaration that the 1963 Trust Deed is valid and subsisting.