Palmer v Simmonds
A gift of the bulk of a person's estate is too uncertain to create a trust.
Facts
A testatrix left her residuary estate to Thomas Harrison, but said that if he died without children, he should leave the bulk of her residuary estate to certain named people. Harrison died without children, and the question was whether there was a valid trust for the named people of the bulk of the estate.
Legal principle
Kindersley V-C held that no trust had been created, because the words the bulk of the estate were too uncertain to identify the subject matter of the trust. Bulk means the greater part, but it is impossible to say how much of the estate this would be. Since the subject matter was uncertain, Harrison took the property absolutely.
Related cases on certainty of intention and subject matter
- Re Adams and the Kensington Vestry (1884) 27 Ch D 394
- Boyce v Boyce (1849) 16 Sim 476
- Comiskey v Bowring-Hanbury [1905] AC 84
- Re Golay's Will Trusts [1965] 1 WLR 969
- Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd [1995] 1 AC 74
- Hunter v Moss [1994] 1 WLR 452
- Jones v Lock (1865) LR 1 Ch App 25
- Re Kayford Ltd [1975] 1 WLR 279
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.
