Scribd
Upload
21 views2 pages

Private Purpose Trusts

Uploaded by

puvana
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
21 views2 pages

Private Purpose Trusts

Uploaded by

puvana
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Private Purpose Trusts

 Morice v Bishop of Durham


o Bequest would fail as a charity because object was not exclusively
charitable + invalid as PT
o Lord Eldon, execution of a trust shall be under the control of court,
administration can review by court (or) court can executed the trust if
trustee dies

 Re Astor’s Settlement Trust


o Trust void for uncertainty as there are no such person with power to
enforce the rights and no duties imposed on trustees

 Reasons for a failure of a private purpose trust


o The lack a beneficiary principle
o Uncertainty of objects
 Unnamed / unfound trust – trust will fail
 Re Endacott
 Testator transferred – residuary estate to Devon Parish
Council ‘for the purposes of providing some useful
memorial to myself’.
 held not to be valid as it was too vague
 Lord Evershed MR – no out-and-out gift to council
created but testator intended to impose the obligation
 Failed for uncertainty of object
o The infringement of the perpetuity rule
 Perpetuity rule
 any interest lasts for longer than the life of the
beneficiary, plus 21 years.
 No valid trust if interest last longer than this period
 Time will begin run from the date the instrument creating the gift
takes effect
 Will takes effect after death of executor
 Exceptions to the Astor principle
o Trust for the maintenance of animals
 Gift – animal Generally – charitable
 Maintenance for specific animals – valid PPT – like pets
 Pettingall v Pettingall
 £50 per annum for the benefit of testator’s black mare
 Willingness of executor to carry out the testator’s wishes
– valid trust was created in favour of the animal


Re Dean
 750 per annum – maintenance of his horse and hounds –
valid
o Monument cases
Building of a memorial (or) monument in memory of an
individual – not charitable
 If trustee express a desire to perform the task – valid purpose
trust may exist
 Mussett v Bingle
o 1st disposition - £300 to build monument to the
testator’s wife’s first husband – valid
o 2nd disposition £200 maintenance for memorial –
void as it against rule of perpetuity (no duration of
maintenance stated)
 Re Hooper
o Maintenance of toms and monuments - valid
o In this case it stated as long they legally could do,
held to be under common law (21 years)
o Saying of Masses
 Bourne v Keane
 Masses – valid
 not charitable in advancement of religion
 Later on, court decided – void as it is lack of human beneficiary
– coz they were superstitious activities

 Departures from the beneficiary principle


o Re Denley’s Trust Deed - The Denley Approach
 Goff J – upheld the trust  title to land was held on trust for the
purpose of providing a recreation ground for the employees of a
particular company
 Goff J regarded the employees as persons so directly benefitted
by the purpose
 the purpose was not of such an abstract kind as to fall
foul of the beneficiary principle
 employees had standing to enforce the purpose against
the trustees
o Re Denley's Trust Deed [1969] 1 Ch 373 is an English trusts law case,
concerning the policy of the "beneficiary principle". It held that so long
as the people benefitting from a trust can at least be said to have a
direct and tangible interest, so as to have the locus standi to enforce a
trust, it would be valid.

You might also like