|
|
|
Home > Law > Law glossary > Law glossary
IRC v Broadway Cottages Trust (1955)
Last modified: Thu Feb 23 16:37:37 2006
[1955] Ch 20. A settlment attempted to apply the income of a
fund of about £80,000 for the benefit of a number of different
categories of individual. The trustees were given full discretion
how to distribute the income and, within the schedule of beneficiaries,
to whom. It was common ground that the exact set of
beneficiaries could not be determined, but that the trust instrument
was worded in such a way that it could readily be determined whether
a particular individual was within the terms of the trust, or not.
The case thus turned on whether the correct test for
CertaintyOfObjects was whether a full list of beneficiaries
could be drawn up, or whether it was sufficient merely to be able to
establish whether some individual was, or was not, a potential
beneficiary.
Despite the obvious advantages to using the `is or is not' test of
certainty, the Court of Appeal decided to uphold the traditional
view that it must be possible to enumerate the beneficiaries.
Giving judgement for the Court, Jenkins LJ said:
``We confess to some sympathy for the appellants' argument, which has about it
an attractive air of common sense, but we do not think that it can be allowed
to prevail. We think the submissions made on behalf of the Crown, to the effect
that the trust is not one which the court could control or execute, and that
this objection cannot be met by urging the improbability of assistance by the
court ever becoming necessary, are well founded.''
For a detailed dicussion, see CertaintyOfObjects.
CaseLaw
Law glossary index
|
|
|
|
Shameless plug
|
 By the author of this site. Buy on-line from Amazon USA | UK
|
|