Lorenz v Caruana & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 606 (09 May 2025)

Lorenz v Caruana & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 606 (09 May 2025)

The Master was entitled to conclude that there was a real prospect of further relevant evidence emerging at trial that could support the existence of a secret trust, and the Judge was wrong to overturn that decision; the claim should not have been struck out or summarily dismissed at this stage.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 606
Parties
Appellant: Robert Jacques Lorenz; First Respondent: Sheila Caruana; Second Respondent: Anthony Michael Lorenz; Third Respondent: Vivien Angela Vanessa Manessah
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (chancery Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Master's decision restored.
Legal Topics
Secret Trusts, Three Certainties, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Inheritance Tax Avoidance
Equity and Trusts Wills and Probate Secret Trusts Three Certainties Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Inheritance Tax Avoidance

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 2 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Jacques Lorenz

Appellant

Sheila Caruana

First Respondent

Anthony Michael Lorenz

Second Respondent

Vivien Angela Vanessa Manessah

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (chancery Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for a secret trust over the residuary estate discloses a real prospect of success at trial
  2. 2 Whether the requirements of certainty of intention, subject matter, and objects are met for a secret trust
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment or strike out is appropriate in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The Master was entitled to conclude that there was a real prospect of further relevant evidence emerging at trial that could support the existence of a secret trust, and the Judge was wrong to overturn that decision; the claim should not have been struck out or summarily dismissed at this stage.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Master's decision restored.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The decision of the Master refusing to strike out or grant summary judgment is restored.