What is the ratio in Pennington v Waine?

The ratio establishes that equity will perfect an imperfect gift when it would be unconscionable for the donor to recall it, even if legal formalities remain incomplete.

What did the court decide in Pennington v Waine?

The Court of Appeal decided that an imperfect gift of shares was effective because the donor had done all she intended and the donee was told the gift was complete, making recall unconscionable.

Why is Pennington v Waine important for equity and trusts?

It controversially expanded the circumstances when equity will perfect imperfect gifts, moving beyond traditional formality requirements to prevent unconscionable conduct, though creating some legal uncertainty.

What is the ratio in Pennington v Waine?

The ratio establishes that equity will perfect an imperfect gift when it would be unconscionable for the donor to recall it, even if legal formalities remain incomplete.

What did the court decide in Pennington v Waine?

The Court of Appeal decided that an imperfect gift of shares was effective because the donor had done all she intended and the donee was told the gift was complete, making recall unconscionable.

Why is Pennington v Waine important for equity and trusts?

It controversially expanded the circumstances when equity will perfect imperfect gifts, moving beyond traditional formality requirements to prevent unconscionable conduct, though creating some legal uncertainty.

Equity & Trusts1 min read

Pennington v Waine

[2002] EWCA Civ 227Court of Appeal2002

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Equity & Trusts cases →

“Equity can perfect imperfect share gifts when unconscionable to withdraw”

Facts

Harold Pennington wished to give 400 shares in a private company to his nephew and signed a share transfer form. His agent told the nephew the shares were his and that no further action was needed. Harold died before the transfer was registered with the company.

Issues

Whether an imperfect gift of shares could be perfected in equity despite non-compliance with the formal requirements for share transfer under the Stock Transfer Act 1963.

Held

The Court of Appeal held that equity would perfect the imperfect gift as it would be unconscionable to allow Harold's estate to resile from the gift.

Significance

This case represents a significant departure from the strict rule in Milroy v Lord, allowing equity to intervene more readily to perfect imperfect gifts where unconscionability is established.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of Pennington v Waine. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

Pennington v Waine [2002] EWCA Civ 227, [2002] 1 WLR 2075

EquityTrustsCompany LawGift

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLBGDL

More Equity & Trusts cases

Yiannakis Chambi v Aristos Aristodemou & Anor

[2026] EWHC 599 (Ch)

Louise Mary Harris & Anor v Neil Quantick & Anor

[2026] EWHC 137 (Ch)

Amaal Ventures Ltd & Anor v Eros Ltd

[2026] EWHC Ch 870

Jonathan Frank Bown v Clive Shipley & Anor

[2026] EWHC 918 (Ch)

Bhattacharya & Anor v Robert Armstrong & Anor

[2026] EWHC Ch 759

Joanna Rich v JDDR Capital Limited

[2026] EWHC 853 (Ch)

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.