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.

Boardman v Phipps established that fiduciaries who make unauthorized profits using information obtained through their position must account for those profits, even if they acted honestly and the principal benefited. The case clarified the strict liability nature of the fiduciary no-profit rule in English law.

This case established that pension fund trustees must prioritize the financial interests of beneficiaries over political, social or ethical considerations. The National Union of Mineworkers objected to their pension fund investing in overseas assets or energy companies competing with coal, but the court ruled trustees have a fiduciary duty to maximize returns within prudent risk parameters.

Reid, a Crown prosecutor in Hong Kong, accepted bribes and used them to purchase properties in New Zealand. The Privy Council held that a fiduciary who receives a bribe holds it and any property acquired with it on constructive trust for his principal from the moment of receipt, giving the principal proprietary rights including the benefit of any increase in value.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Beneficiaries' occupation rights cannot override trustees' statutory sale powers

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

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.

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

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

House of Lords clarifies tracing rules for mixed trust funds

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

Danckwerts J held that a secret trust beneficiary can witness a will without invalidating their interest, as secret trusts operate outside the Wills Act.

Judges cannot decide cases where they have any financial interest whatsoever.

The House of Lords established that secret trusts can exist even when the will makes a beneficial gift to the secret trustee, provided the trustee accepts the trust obligation.

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

Charitable purposes must be exclusively charitable with no significant non-charitable elements.

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

House of Lords establishes employer duty of mutual trust and confidence

Purpose trusts valid when beneficiaries have direct enforceable interest

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

Local authorities must act reasonably, owing fiduciary duty to ratepayers.

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