Holder v Holder
An executor who had done very little in the administration of an estate and bought property from it at a fair price at auction was not caught by the self dealing rule.
Facts
Victor Holder was appointed an executor of his father's will. He took some minor steps in the administration of the estate, but then purported to renounce his executorship. He then bought two farms that belonged to the estate at a public auction, at a good price. His brother, who was a beneficiary, sought to have the sale set aside, because Victor was an executor and so a fiduciary.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that the sale should not be set aside. Harman LJ said that the rule against self dealing was not to be applied mechanically. Victor had never really assumed the duties of an executor, he had not acquired any special knowledge as executor, he had not interfered in the arrangements for the sale, and the beneficiaries had not looked to him to protect their interests. The farms were sold at a fair price at a public auction. The brother had also acquiesced in the sale by taking part of the proceeds.
Related cases on fiduciary duties
- Attorney General for Hong Kong v Reid [1994] 1 AC 324
- Boardman v Phipps [1967] 2 AC 46
- Bray v Ford [1896] AC 44
- Bristol and West Building Society v Mothew [1998] Ch 1
- Re Duke of Norfolk's Settlement Trusts [1982] Ch 61
- FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [2014] UKSC 45, [2015] AC 250
- Guinness plc v Saunders [1990] 2 AC 663
- Industrial Development Consultants Ltd v Cooley [1972] 1 WLR 443
Studying equity and trusts? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
