Introduction
Re Buchanan-Wollaston’s Conveyance [1939] Ch 738 is an important case in property law dealing with trusts that restrict land sales. This decision clarifies when courts may permit the sale of land held under a trust, even when the trust terms block such action. The primary principle established is that the settlor’s expressed wishes hold significant weight but are not absolute in all cases. Courts can intervene to approve a sale if the trust’s initial objective becomes unworkable or if maintaining the restriction negatively affects the beneficiaries. For judicial action, clear evidence must show the trust’s aim is no longer achievable or that a sale would benefit those involved.
The Facts of Re Buchanan-Wollaston’s Conveyance
Four individuals purchased adjacent coastal properties. They agreed to prevent construction on the land to preserve an unobstructed sea view. This condition was included in the legal transfer, forming a trust. Later, two owners sought to sell their properties, while the other two opposed to protect the view.
The Trust’s Objective and Its Breakdown
The trust’s central aim was to sustain the sea view for all owners. The restriction on sales supported this goal. However, disagreement among the owners resulted in legal proceedings. The Court of Appeal determined whether the trust’s objective had been sufficiently compromised to justify overriding the sales restriction.
The Court’s Authority to Approve a Sale
The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s finding that the trust’s purpose had not been entirely defeated. Selling two properties might reduce the view’s quality, but the core benefit for the remaining owners remained. The court denied the sale request. This case illustrates that while a trust’s objective is highly valued, courts might permit sales despite restrictions if the purpose becomes unworkable or harms beneficiaries.
Comparing Re Buchanan-Wollaston’s with Similar Cases
Re Buchanan-Wollaston’s Conveyance is frequently contrasted with cases such as Re Mayo’s Conveyance [1944] Ch 302, where a sale was approved despite a restriction. In Re Mayo, wartime conditions rendered the trust’s objective unworkable. This distinction highlights how specific circumstances determine whether a trust’s purpose remains viable.
Applying the Principles from Re Buchanan-Wollaston’s Conveyance
The principles from this case inform later rulings on trust-based sales restrictions. They assist courts in deciding when to permit sales, balancing the settlor’s aims against beneficiaries’ welfare. Courts assess whether the trust’s purpose is unachievable, the specific context, and whether a sale would safeguard beneficiaries’ interests. For instance, if external factors severely reduce land value, making maintenance impractical, courts might approve a sale to protect financial stakes.
Conclusion
Re Buchanan-Wollaston’s Conveyance remains a foundational case on trusts limiting land sales. It affirms that settlors’ intentions are highly respected but not absolute. Courts may authorize sales if the trust’s purpose fails or the restriction harms beneficiaries. This decision provides a framework to balance trust conditions with beneficiaries’ evolving circumstances. Cases like Re Mayo’s Conveyance demonstrate how factual differences shape outcomes. This legal domain reflects courts’ responsibility to ensure trusts operate fairly for those they serve.
