“Court rejected extension of anomalous exceptions to non-charitable purpose trust invalidity.”
A testator left money to provide 'some useful memorial to myself' in a parish. The gift was not charitable and was essentially for the purpose of creating a memorial rather than benefiting identifiable persons.
Should the court extend the recognized anomalous exceptions to the rule against non-charitable purpose trusts to validate this memorial gift?
The Court of Appeal held the gift was void as a non-charitable purpose trust. The court refused to extend the anomalous exceptions beyond the established narrow categories like monuments and tombs, maintenance of animals, and saying of masses.
This case confirmed the restrictive approach to purpose trusts and prevented the erosion of the beneficiary principle through expanded exceptions. It remains important for demonstrating judicial reluctance to extend anomalous exceptions and maintaining the theoretical coherence of trust law.
You're reading the free summary of Re Endacott. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
Re Endacott [1960] Ch 232
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.