Hart & Anor v Burbidge & Ors [2013] EWHC 1628 (Ch) (12 June 2013)

Hart & Anor v Burbidge & Ors [2013] EWHC 1628 (Ch) (12 June 2013)

The court found that although Susan Burbidge was in a position of trust and confidence with her mother Phyllis Hart, and the transactions were of a nature and size to call for explanation, the evidence did not establish that the impugned transactions were procured by undue influence. Phyllis Hart was found to have...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 1628 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Kenneth Charles Hart; Claimant: Paul Roger Hart; Defendant: Susan Anne Burbidge; Defendant: Brian Jeffery Burbidge; Claimant/defendant: Arthur Kenneth Gerald Samways; Claimant/defendant: Graham Douglas Samways; Claimant/defendant: Christine Margaret Garlinge; Claimant/defendant: Peter Kenneth Hart; Claimant/defendant: Lewis Roger Hart; Claimant/defendant: Gemma Louise Hart
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Trial (consolidated Claims) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Undue Influence, Ademption, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Gifts Inter Vivos, Wills and Probate
Equity Probate Trusts and Estates Undue Influence Ademption Breach of Fiduciary Duty Gifts Inter Vivos Wills and Probate

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth Charles Hart

Claimant

Paul Roger Hart

Claimant

Susan Anne Burbidge

Defendant

Brian Jeffery Burbidge

Defendant

Arthur Kenneth Gerald Samways

Claimant/defendant

Graham Douglas Samways

Claimant/defendant

Christine Margaret Garlinge

Claimant/defendant

Peter Kenneth Hart

Claimant/defendant

Lewis Roger Hart

Claimant/defendant

Gemma Louise Hart

Claimant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Trial (consolidated Claims) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Susan Burbidge exerted undue influence over Phyllis Hart in relation to the transfer of assets and sale of properties in 2008
  2. 2 Whether the impugned transactions should be set aside for undue influence
  3. 3 Whether Brian Burbidge is liable as a knowing recipient

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although Susan Burbidge was in a position of trust and confidence with her mother Phyllis Hart, and the transactions were of a nature and size to call for explanation, the evidence did not establish that the impugned transactions were procured by undue influence. Phyllis Hart was found to have acted with sufficient independence and understanding, and the claimants failed to discharge the burden of proof required to set aside the transactions. There was no breach of fiduciary duty established against Susan Burbidge as attorney.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • The claims in both actions are dismissed.
  • No order setting aside the impugned transactions.