Jeffreys & Ors v Scruton & Ors

Jeffreys & Ors v Scruton & Ors

The Will is unambiguous and, on its true construction, Clause 5(c)(iii) operates as a separate trust for the issue of Laura’s brothers and sisters, not as ultimate default beneficiaries to validate the trustee power to appoint additional beneficiaries. The power to appoint additional beneficiaries is not exercisable because the preceding trusts failed for lack of a beneficiary and Clause 5(c)(iii) does not resurrect that power.

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 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Trust Fund held on trust for the class of beneficiaries in Clause 5(c)(iii); power to appoint additional beneficiaries not exercisable.
Legal Topics
Construction of Wills, Trustee Powers, Default Beneficiaries, Interpretation of Testamentary Documents
Trusts Probate Wills Construction of Wills Trustee Powers Default Beneficiaries Interpretation of Testamentary Documents

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 2
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 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the power to appoint additional beneficiaries under Clause 5(a)(ii)(4) of the Will is exercisable
  2. 2 Whether Clause 5(c)(iii) operates as a separate trust or as part of a composite trust
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'failure' of trusts in the Will

Ratio Decidendi

The Will is unambiguous and, on its true construction, Clause 5(c)(iii) operates as a separate trust for the issue of Laura’s brothers and sisters, not as ultimate default beneficiaries to validate the trustee power to appoint additional beneficiaries. The power to appoint additional beneficiaries is not exercisable because the preceding trusts failed for lack of a beneficiary and Clause 5(c)(iii) does not resurrect that power.

Court Disposition

Trust Fund held on trust for the class of beneficiaries in Clause 5(c)(iii); power to appoint additional beneficiaries not exercisable.

Orders

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