Jeffreys & Ors v Scruton & Ors [2020] EWHC 536 (Ch) (09 March 2020)

Jeffreys & Ors v Scruton & Ors [2020] EWHC 536 (Ch) (09 March 2020)

The Will is unambiguous and Clause 5(c)(iii) operates as a separate fixed trust for the issue of Laura's brothers and sisters, triggered by the failure of the preceding trusts. The trustees' power to appoint additional beneficiaries under Clause 5(a)(ii)(4) is not exercisable once the fixed trust comes into effect. Extrinsic evidence of Laura's intention is not admissible as the language of the Will is clear and not ambiguous.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 536 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Christopher Henry Mark Jeffreys; Claimant: Sonamara Marie-Amelie Jeffreys; Claimant: Matthew Neil Richard Duncan; Defendant: Sam Scruton; Defendant: Lucy Scruton; Defendant: Alice Jeffreys; Defendant: Arthur Jeffreys; Defendant: Indiana Jeffreys; Defendant: Maddison Jeffreys; Defendant: Tyler Jeffreys; Defendant: Jack Prince; Defendant: Lara Prince; Defendant: Luke Clark; Defendant: Eve Clark (A Child); Defendant: Ivo Clark (A Child); Defendant: Matilda Clark (A Child); Defendant: Olive Clark (A Child); Defendant: Esme Clark (A Child); Defendant: Sophie Scruton; Defendant: Samantha Clark
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Probate/trust Dispute / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Declaration granted; trustees' power to appoint additional beneficiaries is not exercisable.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Wills, Trustee Powers, Beneficiary Principle, Default Trusts, Extrinsic Evidence
Trusts Probate Wills Interpretation of Wills Trustee Powers Beneficiary Principle Default Trusts Extrinsic Evidence

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Henry Mark Jeffreys

Claimant

Sonamara Marie-Amelie Jeffreys

Claimant

Matthew Neil Richard Duncan

Claimant

Sam Scruton

Defendant

Lucy Scruton

Defendant

Alice Jeffreys

Defendant

Arthur Jeffreys

Defendant

Indiana Jeffreys

Defendant

Maddison Jeffreys

Defendant

Tyler Jeffreys

Defendant

Jack Prince

Defendant

Lara Prince

Defendant

Luke Clark

Defendant

Eve Clark (A Child)

Defendant

Ivo Clark (A Child)

Defendant

Matilda Clark (A Child)

Defendant

Olive Clark (A Child)

Defendant

Esme Clark (A Child)

Defendant

Sophie Scruton

Defendant

Samantha Clark

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate/trust Dispute / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trustees' power to appoint additional beneficiaries under Clause 5(a)(ii)(4) of the Will is exercisable
  2. 2 Interpretation of Clause 5(c)(iii) of the Will: does it operate as a separate trust or as part of a composite trust
  3. 3 Whether extrinsic evidence of the testatrix's intention is admissible under Section 21 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982

Ratio Decidendi

The Will is unambiguous and Clause 5(c)(iii) operates as a separate fixed trust for the issue of Laura's brothers and sisters, triggered by the failure of the preceding trusts. The trustees' power to appoint additional beneficiaries under Clause 5(a)(ii)(4) is not exercisable once the fixed trust comes into effect. Extrinsic evidence of Laura's intention is not admissible as the language of the Will is clear and not ambiguous.

Court Disposition

Declaration granted; trustees' power to appoint additional beneficiaries is not exercisable.

Orders

  • Upon Laura's death, the trusts declared by Clause 5(a), (b) and (c)(i) and (ii) of the Will failed.
  • The Trust Fund is held upon trust for the class of beneficiaries entitled under Clause 5(c)(iii) of the Will.