Re Hooper
A trust for the upkeep of family graves and monuments was valid for the perpetuity period, as one of the anomalous exceptions to the beneficiary principle.
Facts
Mr Hooper left money to trustees for the care and upkeep of certain family graves and monuments in a churchyard and a tablet in a church, for as long as the trustees could legally do so. The care of the graves was not charitable, although the care of the tablet in the church might be. The question was whether the trust was valid.
Legal principle
Maugham J held that the trust was valid for 21 years, the perpetuity period. Trusts for the maintenance of tombs and monuments are one of the recognised exceptions to the rule that non charitable purpose trusts are void, even though there is no one to enforce them, provided they are limited to the perpetuity period. The words for so long as they legally can were sufficient to limit the trust to that period.
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 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
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.
