Skip to main content

Landmark Equity & Trusts cases

Foundational UK equity authorities — express, resulting, and constructive trusts; fiduciary duties — ordered by citation impact.

50 landmarks, ordered by citation impact.

  1. 01

    Milroy v Lord

    (1862) 4 De GF & J 264 · Court of Appeal · 1862

    Imperfect gifts cannot be rescued by implying declaration of trust

  2. 02

    Strong v Bird

    (1874) LR 18 Eq 315 · Court of Chancery · 1874

    Imperfect gifts can be perfected when donee becomes donor's executor

  3. 03

    Hunter v Moss

    [1994] 1 WLR 452 · 1993

    A trust of intangible property need not identify specific assets from a larger identical mass.

  4. 04

    Tinsley v Milligan

    [1994] 1 AC 340 · House of Lords · 1994

    Illegal trust participants can recover property without relying on illegality

  5. 05

    Pennington v Waine

    [2002] EWCA Civ 227 · Court of Appeal · 2002

    Equity can perfect imperfect share gifts when unconscionable to withdraw

  6. 06

    Keech v Sandford

    (1726) Sel Cas Ch 61 · Court of Chancery · 1726

    Trustees cannot profit from their position even without fraud or misconduct

  7. 07

    Morice v Bishop of Durham

    (1805) 10 Ves 522 · Court of Chancery · 1805

    Court establishes certainty requirement for charitable trusts and cy-près doctrine

  8. 08

    Knight v Knight

    (1840) 3 Beav 148 · Court of Chancery · 1840

    Court establishes three certainties doctrine for valid trust creation

  9. 09

    Saunders v Vautier

    (1841) 4 Beav 115 · Court of Chancery · 1841

    Adult beneficiaries can terminate trusts early and demand transfer of assets

  10. 10

    Certainty of Subject Matter — Palmer v Simmonds

    (1854) 2 Drew 221 · Chancery Division · 1854

    Trusts fail if subject matter lacks certainty - 'bulk of estate' insufficient.

  11. 11

    McCormick v Grogan

    (1869) LR 4 HL 82 · House of Lords · 1869

    Equity enforces secret trusts to prevent fraud despite apparent contradiction of statutory formalities.

  12. 12

    Barnes v Addy

    (1874) LR 9 Ch App 244 · Court of Chancery · 1874

    Third parties liable for breach of trust through dishonest assistance or knowing receipt

  13. 13

    Re Hallett's Estate

    (1880) 13 Ch D 696 · Court of Appeal · 1880

    Trustee cannot claim benefit of doubt when mixing trust funds with own money

  14. 14

    Commissioners for Special Purposes of Income Tax v Pemsel

    [1891] AC 531 · House of Lords · 1891

    Established the four heads of charity: religion, education, relief of poverty, other purposes beneficial to community.

  15. 15

    Re Stead

    [1900] 1 Ch 237 · Chancery Division · 1900

    Half-secret trusts fail when communicated terms differ from will provisions

  16. 16

    Re Gardner (No 2)

    [1923] 2 Ch 230 · Chancery Division · 1923

    Secret trusts bind accepting trustees despite non-acceptance by co-trustees

  17. 17

    Blackwell v Blackwell

    [1929] AC 318 · House of Lords · 1929

    Secret trusts bind trustees despite beneficial gifts under wills

  18. 18

    Re Diplock

    [1948] Ch 465 · Court of Appeal · 1948

    Court creates personal remedy against innocent recipients of wrongly distributed estate funds

  19. 19

    Re Coulthurst

    [1951] Ch 661 · Court of Appeal · 1951

    Educational trusts must benefit sufficient section of public, not just company employees' relatives.

  20. 20

    Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities Trust

    [1951] AC 297 · House of Lords · 1951

    Trust for company employees' children fails public benefit test for charity

  21. 21

    Re Young

    [1951] Ch 344 · Chancery Division · 1951

    Secret trust beneficiaries can witness wills without losing their interests

  22. 22

    Re Scarisbrick

    [1951] Ch 622 · Court of Appeal · 1951

    Religious trusts for specific denominations or groups can be charitable despite restricted beneficiaries.

  23. 23

    Re Rose

    [1952] Ch 499 · Court of Appeal · 1952

    Gift complete in equity when donor does everything in their power

  24. 24

    Re Astor's Settlement Trusts

    [1952] Ch 534 · Chancery Division · 1952

    Non-charitable purpose trusts void for lack of beneficiaries to enforce them.

  25. 25

    IRC v Broadway Cottages Trust

    [1955] Ch 20 · Court of Appeal · 1955

    Discretionary trusts required complete list of all possible beneficiaries for validity.

  26. 26

    Grey v IRC

    [1960] AC 1 · House of Lords · 1960

    Oral dispositions of equitable interests are void without writing under s53(1)(c)

  27. 27

    Re Endacott

    [1960] Ch 232 · Court of Appeal · 1960

    Court rejected extension of anomalous exceptions to non-charitable purpose trust invalidity.

  28. 28

    Oughtred v IRC

    [1960] AC 206 · House of Lords · 1960

    Contracts for equitable interests need separate written disposition despite specific enforceability

  29. 29

    Neville Estates v Madden

    [1962] Ch 832 · Chancery Division · 1962

    Threefold classification of gifts to unincorporated associations; synagogue land held on valid charitable trust.

  30. 30

    Re Londonderry's Settlement

    [1965] Ch 918 · Court of Appeal · 1965

    Beneficiaries cannot compel trustees to disclose reasons for exercising discretionary powers.

  31. 31

    Vandervell v IRC

    [1967] 2 AC 291 · House of Lords · 1967

    Incomplete trust dispositions cannot escape beneficial ownership for tax purposes

  32. 32

    Boardman v Phipps

    [1967] 2 AC 46 · House of Lords · 1967

    Fiduciaries must account for unauthorized profits despite acting honestly

  33. 33

    Re Denley's Trust Deed

    [1969] 1 Ch 373 · Chancery Division · 1969

    Purpose trusts valid when beneficiaries have direct enforceable interest

  34. 34

    Re Gulbenkian

    [1970] AC 508 · House of Lords · 1970

    House of Lords clarifies crucial distinction between trusts and powers

  35. 35

    McPhail v Doulton

    [1971] AC 424 · House of Lords · 1971

    House of Lords relaxes certainty test for discretionary trusts

  36. 36

    Secret Trusts — Ottaway v Norman

    [1972] Ch 698 · Chancery Division · 1972

    Secret trusts can be established by clear evidence of intention, communication and acceptance.

  37. 37

    Re Recher's Will Trusts

    [1972] Ch 526 · Chancery Division · 1972

    Gifts to unincorporated associations valid as beneficial gifts to members under contract-holding theory.

  38. 38

    Dingle v Turner

    [1972] AC 601 · House of Lords · 1972

    Poverty trusts can benefit defined classes and remain charitable despite personal connections.

  39. 39

    Re Baden's Deed Trusts (No 2)

    [1973] Ch 9 · Court of Appeal · 1973

    Discretionary trusts valid if clear cases identifiable despite uncertain borderline cases.

  40. 40

    Re Vandervell's Trusts (No 2)

    [1974] Ch 269 · Court of Appeal · 1974

    Resulting trusts can be displaced by trustee conduct evidencing express trust intention

  41. 41

    Injunctions — American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd

    [1975] AC 396 · House of Lords · 1975

    Interim injunctions granted where serious question, inadequate damages, and balance favours applicant.

  42. 42

    Re Kayford Ltd

    [1975] 1 WLR 279 · Chancery Division · 1975

    Company can create trust of customer deposits by segregation with clear trust intention.

  43. 43

    Paul v Constance

    [1977] 1 WLR 527 · Court of Appeal · 1977

    Informal words 'money is as much yours as mine' created valid express trust

  44. 44

    Re Tucks Settlement Trusts

    [1978] Ch 49 · 1977

    Chief Rabbi clause valid; expert determination can cure conceptual uncertainty in trusts

  45. 45

    Re Snowden

    [1979] Ch 528 · Chancery Division · 1979

    Half-secret trusts valid if terms communicated before or contemporaneously with will execution.

  46. 46

    Constructive Trusts — Chase Manhattan Bank NA v Israel-British Bank (London) Ltd

    [1981] Ch 105 · Chancery Division · 1981

    Mistaken payments create immediate constructive trusts giving equitable proprietary interests.

  47. 47

    Cowan v Scargill

    [1985] Ch 270 · Chancery Division · 1985

    Pension trustees must put financial returns before political ideology

  48. 48

    Unjust Enrichment — Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd

    [1991] 2 AC 548 · House of Lords · 1991

    Unjust enrichment recognized as independent cause of action requiring restitution subject to defenses.

  49. 49

    Attorney General for Hong Kong v Reid

    [1994] 1 AC 324 · 1993

    Bribe proceeds held on constructive trust from moment of receipt by fiduciary

  50. 50

    Re Goldcorp Exchange

    [1995] 1 AC 74 · 1994

    No trust arises over unascertained goods without appropriation or sufficient certainty of subject matter