Target Holdings v Redferns established fundamental principles about causation and loss in breach of trust claims. The House of Lords held that trustees are only liable for losses that would not have occurred but for their breach, revolutionizing how trust law approaches compensation.

The Court of Appeal established the test for third party liability in breach of trust cases, requiring either dishonest assistance or knowing receipt.

Section 2(1) damages assessed on fraud basis, including all consequential losses.

Milroy v Lord established the fundamental principle that for a gift to be valid, it must be completely constituted either by transfer of legal title (whether to the donee outright or to trustees) or by declaration of trust. The case demonstrates that an imperfect gift cannot be saved by treating it as a declaration of trust unless there is clear evidence of such intention.

House of Lords establishes employer duty of mutual trust and confidence

Supreme Court recasts SAAMCO and widens focus on scope of duty

Strong v Bird established the rule that an imperfect gift can be perfected where the intended donee later becomes the donor's executor. This case created an important exception to the general rule that equity will not assist a volunteer to perfect an imperfect gift.

Court distinguishes fiduciary duties from professional negligence in landmark ruling

Moss orally declared himself trustee of 50 of his 950 shares in a private company for Hunter's benefit. The Court of Appeal held that a trust of intangible property (shares) does not fail for uncertainty of subject matter even when the specific shares are not segregated from the larger holding, distinguishing tangible chattels.

Tinsley v Milligan established that a party can recover property held under an illegal trust if they can prove their equitable interest without relying on the illegality. The case clarified the application of the 'reliance principle' in cases involving illegal transactions between joint participants.

Pennington v Waine established that equity can perfect an imperfect gift of shares even without formal transfer where it would be unconscionable to allow the donor to resile from the gift. The case significantly relaxed the strict requirements for share transfers by allowing equitable intervention in appropriate circumstances.

Concurrent liability in contract and tort possible; Hedley Byrne extends to services.

Keech v Sandford established the fundamental principle that trustees cannot profit from their position of trust, even where no fraud or bad faith is involved. A trustee who renewed a lease for his own benefit after being unable to renew it for the trust was held accountable for the profits, creating a cornerstone rule of fiduciary duty.

Landowners liable for natural land movements causing neighbour damage if prevention reasonable.

Morice v Bishop of Durham established the fundamental principle that charitable trusts must have purposes that are sufficiently certain and capable of being carried out by the court. The case created the foundational test for charitable trust validity and the cy-près doctrine in English law.

Knight v Knight established the three certainties required for the creation of a valid trust in English law. The case laid down the fundamental principle that there must be certainty of intention, certainty of subject matter, and certainty of objects for a trust to be legally enforceable.

Hypothetical bargain damages available where traditional loss-based damages inadequate.

A testamentary gift failed for uncertainty where the testator left 'the bulk of my residuary estate' to trustees. The court held that 'bulk' was too vague to constitute a valid trust.

Saunders v Vautier established that adult beneficiaries of a trust who are of sound mind and absolutely entitled can call for the trust property to be transferred to them, even if this terminates the trust earlier than the settlor intended. This fundamental principle gives beneficiaries significant control over trust assets.

No liability for damage to property already damaged by another tortfeasor.

House of Lords decision establishing the doctrine of secret trusts, holding that equity will enforce secret trusts to prevent fraud, even though they appear to contradict statutory formality requirements for wills.

House of Lords establishes liability for negligent misstatement in special relationships

Loss of chance must be substantial to ground contractual damages claim

Re Hallett's Estate established the fundamental principle in trust law that when a trustee wrongfully mixes trust money with their own funds, the beneficiary can claim the mixed fund or any traceable proceeds. This case created the important rule that a trustee cannot profit from their breach by claiming they spent the trust money first.

Mental distress damages require physical inconvenience and must be modest in amount.

House of Lords decision establishing the four heads of charity based on the Charitable Uses Act 1601. This foundational case created the classification system that dominated charity law for over a century.

Duty of care extends to pure economic loss for defective flooring where special relationship exists

The Court of Appeal held that a half-secret trust fails if the terms communicated to trustees differ from those specified in the will.

Divisible injury: damages apportioned where only part of harm attributable to defendant's breach

Contracting parties can recover substantial damages for third party property damage

Negligent hospital escapes liability due to lack of causation

The Court of Appeal established a single test for knowing receipt: whether the recipient's knowledge made it unconscionable to retain the benefit.

Pre-contractual representations can create collateral warranties and negligent misrepresentation liability.

A constructive trust arose where money was paid twice by mistake, creating equitable proprietary interest from the moment of mistaken payment.

Directors must exercise reasonable care but may receive statutory relief for honest mistakes.

The House of Lords held that a contract for sale of equitable interests, even if specifically enforceable, still requires written disposition to transfer the beneficial interest.

Property owners cannot claim contributory negligence against injured burglars

The House of Lords held that oral directions to transfer equitable interests constitute dispositions requiring writing under s53(1)(c) Law of Property Act 1925.

A local authority entered into an ultra vires interest rate swap agreement with a German bank, leading to disputes over restitution and proprietary claims. The House of Lords clarified the law on resulting trusts, unjust enrichment, and restitution of ultra vires payments by public bodies.

Mitigation duty requires reasonable steps but not complex litigation against third parties.

Court establishes landmark test for recoverable damages in contract breach

House of Lords clarifies causation test in medical negligence claims

Unforeseeable chemical reaction made explosion damages too remote despite negligence.

Contractual damages should put innocent party in position as if contract performed.

Professional's disclaimer of liability for negligent advice held unreasonable under UCTA.