Re Dean
A trust for the maintenance of particular horses and hounds was valid as an anomalous exception to the beneficiary principle.
Facts
A testator left his horses and hounds to trustees, together with an annuity of £750 to be paid for 50 years, if any of the animals should live that long, for their maintenance. The question was whether this was a valid trust, given that there was no human beneficiary who could enforce it.
Legal principle
North J held that the trust was valid. He said that a trust for the maintenance of particular animals is valid, even though there is no one who can enforce it, provided that it is not for a period longer than the perpetuity period. The case is one of the recognised anomalous exceptions to the beneficiary principle, although the 50 year period was questionable.
Related cases on purpose trusts and unincorporated associations
- Re Astor's Settlement Trusts [1952] Ch 534
- Re Bucks Constabulary Widows' and Orphans' Fund Friendly Society (No 2) [1979] 1 WLR 936
- Conservative and Unionist Central Office v Burrell [1982] 1 WLR 522
- Re Denley's Trust Deed [1969] 1 Ch 373
- Re Endacott [1960] Ch 232
- Re Grant's Will Trusts [1980] 1 WLR 360
- Hanchett-Stamford v Attorney General [2008] EWHC 330 (Ch), [2009] Ch 173
- Re Hooper [1932] 1 Ch 38
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.
