Holder v Holder

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeLORD JUSTICE HARMAN,LORD JUSTICE DANCKWERTS,LORD JUSTICE SACHS
Judgment Date08 December 1967
Judgment citation (vLex)[1967] EWCA Civ J1208-4
Date08 December 1967
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
47 cases
  • Golden Village Multiplex Pte Ltd v Phoon Chiong Kit
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 28 February 2006
    ...that the plaintiff had consented to his concurrent directorships are irrelevant as can be seen from their facts. In Holder v Holder [1968] Ch 353, the English Court of Appeal held that a beneficiary cannot be heard to complain about a trustee allegedly acting in breach of trust when he had ......
  • Mrs Shanatabi Kashinath Bhusate (personally and as personal representative of the estate of Kashinath Bhusate deceased) v Dr Managala Patel (personally and as personal representative of the estate of Kashinath Bhusate deceased)
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 13 September 2018
    ...not equivalent to cash. 43 An example of very exceptional circumstances can be seen from the decision of the Court of Appeal in Holder v Holder and others [1968] 1 Ch 353. In Holder ‘V’ was one of the deceased's 10 children and an executor of his will with one of his siblings. The deceased'......
  • Re Freeston's Charity
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 25 January 1978
    ...of the Minister to put the matter right. 56 But it does not rest there, because the position was reviewed by this court in the case of Holder v. Holder (1968) Chancery Division, page 353. There each member of the court held that thetrue view of the matter was that one had to have regard to ......
  • Re Cotorro Trust
    • Cayman Islands
    • Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
    • 17 January 1997
    ...(5) -Diplock, In re, Wintle v. Diplock, [1940] Ch. 988. (6) -Douglas-Menzies v. Umphelby, [1908] A.C. 224. (7) -Holder v. Holder, [1968] Ch. 353; [1968] 1 All E.R. 665, followed. (8) -Lemos v. Coutts & Co. (Cayman) Ltd., 1992–93 CILR 460, dicta of Kerr J.A. applied. (9) -McDonald v. Horn, [......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 books & journal articles
  • SELF-DEALING AND NO-PROFIT RULES: COMPANIES ACT 2016
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2020, December 2020
    • 1 December 2020
    ...respectful view, is a tidying exercise as the section is only to impose a criminal sanction against defaulters. 68 Holder v Holder [1968] Ch 353. In this case, it was held that acquiescence and estoppel are not necessarily coterminous and from which assent may be inferred. See the judgment ......
  • Table of Cases
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill Dissenting Judgments in the Law Preliminary Sections
    • 28 August 2018
    ...Ltd’s Air Raid Distress Fund, Re [1946] Ch 194, [1946] 1 All ER 501, 174 LT 428, 62 TLR 313, [1946] WN 65, CA 201, 207 Holder v Holder [1968] Ch 353, [1968] 2 WLR 237, [1968] 1 All ER 665, CA 176 Homburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (The Starsin) [2003] UKHL 12, [2004] 1 AC 715, [200......
  • Administrative Powers for Personal Representatives and Trustees
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill Wills A Practical Guide - 2nd Edition Contents
    • 30 August 2019
    ...which are quoted on the stock market. There are some circumstances in which a court may authorise such a purchase (see Holder v Holder [1968] Ch 353, CA and Ex parte Lacey (1802) 6 Ves 625). It is also possible for beneficiaries to authorise a purchase. PRs should be particularly careful if......
  • Fiduciary Conduct - A Tailored Application Lord Upjohn's Dissent in Boardman v Phipps [1967] 2 AC 46
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill Dissenting Judgments in the Law Part III - Equity and Property Law
    • 28 August 2018
    ...refusing to impose liability. Such safeguards are sufficient to protect the 90 Kane v Radley-Kane [1999] Ch 274. 91 Holder v Holder [1968] Ch 353. 92 Ibid, at pp 395–400. 93 Above, n 91, at p 398. integrity of the rules, and would work to the advantage of some beneficiaries by preserving co......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT