Re Denley's Trust Deed
A trust for a purpose that directly benefits identifiable people, such as a sports ground for employees, is valid, because those people can enforce it.
Facts
A company transferred land to trustees to be used as a sports ground primarily for the benefit of the employees of the company, and secondarily for the benefit of such other persons as the trustees might allow. The trust was limited to the perpetuity period. It was argued that the trust was a non charitable purpose trust, and so void.
Legal principle
Goff J held that the trust was valid. He said that the beneficiary principle applies to purpose trusts that are abstract or impersonal, but not to a trust which, though expressed as a purpose, is directly or indirectly for the benefit of an individual or individuals. The employees had a sufficient interest in the sports ground to enforce the trust, and the class was sufficiently certain, so the trust did not fall foul of the beneficiary principle.
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 Dean (1889) 41 Ch D 552
- 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.
