Shield v Shield & Anor

Shield v Shield & Anor

There was no binding agreement, trust, or proprietary estoppel in favour of Christopher over the Husband’s shares in R A Shield Holdings Limited; the shares remained the Husband’s property, available as a resource in the financial remedy proceedings, and would only pass to Christopher if so bequeathed by will. The parties expressly agreed, on tax advice, not to enter into a binding agreement regarding the shares, and the Husband retained full control and ability to deal with the shares during his lifetime.

Parties
Applicant: Susan Jennifer Shield; Respondent: Richard Arthur Shield; Intervenor: Christopher Richard Francis Shield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Financial Remedy Proceedings (preliminary Issue) / Judgment on Preliminary Issue Prior to FDR
Outcome
Christopher’s claim for a declaration that the shares are held on trust for him fails.
Legal Topics
Constructive Trusts, Proprietary Estoppel, Financial Remedies on Divorce, Company Shareholdings, Inheritance Tax Planning
Family Law Trusts Law Equity Constructive Trusts Proprietary Estoppel Financial Remedies on Divorce Company Shareholdings Inheritance Tax Planning

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Susan Jennifer Shield

Applicant

Richard Arthur Shield

Respondent

Christopher Richard Francis Shield

Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Financial Remedy Proceedings (preliminary Issue) / Judgment on Preliminary Issue Prior to FDR

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent and/or the Applicant’s shareholdings in R A Shield Holdings Limited are held on trust for the Intervenor, and if so on what terms
  2. 2 Whether a constructive trust or proprietary estoppel arises in favour of the Intervenor over the Respondent’s shares

Ratio Decidendi

There was no binding agreement, trust, or proprietary estoppel in favour of Christopher over the Husband’s shares in R A Shield Holdings Limited; the shares remained the Husband’s property, available as a resource in the financial remedy proceedings, and would only pass to Christopher if so bequeathed by will. The parties expressly agreed, on tax advice, not to enter into a binding agreement regarding the shares, and the Husband retained full control and ability to deal with the shares during his lifetime.

Court Disposition

Christopher’s claim for a declaration that the shares are held on trust for him fails.