## Facts

- The case concerned the validity of a trust established for the maintenance of the graves of the testator's family members.
- The trust was non-charitable in nature, aimed at upkeeping private graves rather than serving any wider charitable or public purpose.
- The structure and terms of the trust were examined to determine whether they complied with established legal principles, especially the rule against perpetuities.
- The Chancery Division scrutinized the intention of the testator and the possible classification of the trust.

## Issues

1. Whether a trust established for the maintenance of graves constitutes a valid trust under English law.
2. Whether such a trust, given its non-charitable purpose, complied with the rule against perpetuities.
3. Whether the trust could qualify as a charitable trust based on its purpose or public benefit.
4. What requirements must be met regarding duration and clarity for the trust to be upheld.

## Decision

- The court held that a trust for the maintenance of graves is a non-charitable purpose trust rather than a charitable one.
- Such trusts are valid if their terms limit the duration in line with the rule against perpetuities.
- The court found that the trust in question did not violate legal requirements, provided it was limited in duration and scope.
- The trust was not exempt from scrutiny under perpetuity rules due to its lack of public benefit and charitable status.

## Legal Principles

- Non-charitable purpose trusts, such as those for grave maintenance, are generally valid only if limited in duration and comply with the rule against perpetuities.
- The rule against perpetuities restricts non-charitable trusts to a period not exceeding a lifetime plus 21 years, preventing long-term control over properties for private purposes.
- Charitable trusts benefit from exemptions from the perpetuity rule due to their public benefit, but the maintenance of private graves does not meet this criterion.
- Clear and specific terms are required for such trusts, which must not impose indefinite or excessive burdens on trustees or beneficiaries.

## Conclusion

Re Hooper clarified that trusts for the maintenance of graves, being non-charitable in nature, are valid only if limited in scope and duration, and stresses the importance of adhering to the rule against perpetuities and other legal requirements when creating such trusts.

Re Hooper [1932] 1 Ch 38