Roscoe (James) (Bolton) Ltd v Winder
Beneficiaries cannot trace into a mixed account beyond the lowest intermediate balance, because later payments in are not treated as repaying the trust.
Facts
Mr Wigham bought a business from Roscoe, and agreed to collect its debts and pay the money to Roscoe. He collected about £455, which he paid into his own bank account, and then withdrew money from the account until the balance fell to about £25. He later paid more of his own money into the account. When he died, the balance was about £358. Roscoe claimed the whole balance.
Legal principle
Sargant J held that Roscoe could only trace to the extent of the lowest intermediate balance of the account, about £25. Money paid into the account after the balance had fallen could not be treated as a repayment of the trust money, unless the trustee showed an intention to do so, because the trust money had been dissipated when the balance fell. Roscoe was an unsecured creditor for the rest.
Related cases on tracing and third party liability
- Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1991] Ch 547
- Baden v Société Générale pour Favoriser le Développement du Commerce et de l'Industrie en France SA [1993] 1 WLR 509
- Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Eurotrust International Ltd [2005] UKPC 37, [2006] 1 WLR 1476
- Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Vaughan [1992] 4 All ER 22
- BCCI (Overseas) Ltd v Akindele [2001] Ch 437
- Bishopsgate Investment Management Ltd v Homan [1995] Ch 211
- Devaynes v Noble (Clayton's Case) (1816) 1 Mer 572
- El Ajou v Dollar Land Holdings plc [1994] 2 All ER 685
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.
