This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Re Snowden [1979] 2 All ER 172

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 07/01/2024 19:29

Judgement for the case Re Snowden

KEY POINTS

  • In Trusts and secret trusts, the issue lies in ascertaining the requisite standard of proof necessary to validate or challenge the elements of the trust in question.

  • The central legal inquiry revolves around the nature of the arrangement, probing whether it constitutes a secret trust or aligns more with a moral obligation. This examination considers the testatrix's communicated last wishes and subsequent events, including the brother's demise, to determine the underlying legal obligations and implications.

FACTS

  • Ethel Maud Snowden (‘Testatrix’), aged 86, had been a widow without children and had resided with her brother for approximately six months before her demise on January 16, 1974.

  • The Testatrix executed her will on January 10, 1974, bequeathing the residue of her estate to Alan Duncan Spowage, Reginald Ian Atkins Smithher two executors and trustees with the unequivocal intention that it be held absolutely for her brother.

  • The brother passed away merely six days after the testatrix, on January 22, 1974. His will designate his son (the first Defendant) as the sole residuary beneficiary and executor.

  • The legal scenario involved 19 Defendants, comprising 17 nephews, nieces, great-nephews, and great-nieces of whole or half-blood relationships.

  • An attendance note dated August 30, 1973, by S (the solicitor and executor) recorded the Testatrix's uncertainty about handling her estate and her preference for leaving legacies to nephews and nieces, leaving the remainder for her brother to distribute.

  • On the morning of January 10, 1974, after conversing with the Testatrix, the brother provided instructions over the phone to S, expressing the desire for the final division to be managed by him.

  • The will was executed on the same day, January 10, 1974, in the absence of S but in the presence of two witnesses. Affidavits from the witnesses, dated November and December 1977, detailed the steps taken to ensure the Testatrix's comprehension and approval of the will's terms.

  • Additional evidence included a statement by S in February 1974, amplifying the August 30, 1973, note. The statement emphasized the Testatrix's wish to be fair to everyone, recognizing her brother's contributions and wanting him to oversee the division of the residue.

  • S filed a summons to determine whether the Testatrix's estate was held in trust for the absolute benefit of the brother's son or any of the 19 Defendants, thereby bringing into question the existence of a potential secret trust.

JUDGEMENT

  • The court held that, in the absence of any allegations of fraud, it was determined that the standard of proof required to establish a secret trust was no higher than the ordinary civil standard of proof necessary to establish a conventional trust.

  • The court found insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the Testatrix intended to bind her brother by any legally enforceable trust concerning the disposition of the residue. Instead, it was concluded that there existed no more than a moral obligation on the brother's part to distribute the residue as she might have done.

  • The court ruled that the brother, and consequently the first Defendant, took the residue-free from any secret trust, as the evidence did not support the establishment of a legally binding trust and indicated the presence of a moral obligation instead.

COMMENTARY

  • The case involves legal questions regarding trusts and secret trusts, focusing on establishing the standard of proof. The central inquiry is whether the arrangement is a secret trust or a moral obligation, considering the Testatrix's last wishes and events following her demise.

  • The 86-year-old Testatrix, a widow, designated her brother as the absolute beneficiary of her estate in a will executed on January 10, 1974. The subsequent legal proceedings, involving 19 Defendants and complex familial relationships, highlight the nuanced nature of the case. 

  • The court's judgment clarifies the standard of proof for secret trusts, ultimately recognizing a moral obligation rather than a legally enforceable trust, providing insights into the delicate interplay between legal formalities and moral considerations in estate disposition.

ORIGINAL ANALYSIS

  • Snowden left everything to T, saying that he would know what to do.

  • Megarry VC found no intention on Snowden’s part that he should come under an obligation to distribute the trust, but merely a moral duty. Therefore there was no secret trust. 

Megarry VC

  • The standard of proof for communication, intention and evidence of a trust is the ordinary civil standard (i.e. balance of probabilities).

  • He also endorsed the rationale for enforcing secret trusts that they are inter vivos trusts, constituted by the will.

The whole basis of secret trusts is that they operate outside the will.

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on Re Snowden

Trusts and Equity Notes
1,016 total pages
1805 purchased

Equity notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge. Th...

GDL Equity and Trusts Notes
631 total pages
156 purchased

A collection of the best GDL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an O...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started

Related Product Samples

These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.

Trusts and EquitySecret Trusts Notes (3 pages)
GDL Equity and TrustsSecret Trusts Notes (6 pages)
GDL Equity and TrustsSecret Trusts Notes (14 pages)
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Trusts and Equity Notes
1,016 total pages
1805 purchased

Equity notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge. Th...