The Beneficiary Principle and Purpose Trusts

Proprietary Rights: Beneficiaries of age can terminate a trust and request transfer of property under the rule in Saunders v Vautier [1841]; this requires all beneficiaries to agree per Re Smith [1928].
Personal Rights: Beneficiaries hold rights against trustees to ensure proper management and the replacement of lost property, established in Earl of Oxford’s Case (1615).
Beneficiary vs. Purpose: Trusts must distinguish between identifiable beneficiaries and purposes. Re Denley’s Trust Deed [1969] allows a trust for an identifiable class (e.g., employees), whereas Leahy v AG for NSW [1959] found a bequest to an order of nuns was for a purpose/order rather than the individuals.

General Rule: NCPTs are typically void due to a lack of an enforcer, uncertainty of objects, and the rule against perpetuities.
Uncertainty: In Morice v Bishop of Durham, "benevolence and liberty" was too vague. Re Astor’s Settlement [1952] ruled that purpose trusts must be defined well enough for a court to carry them out if trustees fail.
Specific Failures: Re Shaw failed due to its object of a $40$ letter alphabet.

Common Law Period: Defined as 'lives in being plus $21$ years' in Re Thompson [1934]. "Lives" refers strictly to human lives per Re Kelly [1932].
Statutory Periods: * Perpetuities Act (NI) 1966: Allows a specified period up to $80$ years; defaults to $21$ years if none is specified. * Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 2009 (E&W): Increases the period to $125$ years (does not apply to Northern Ireland).
Public Policy: The rule prevents the 'dead hand' of the settlor from controlling property indefinitely; however, it does not apply to charitable trusts.

Tombs and Monuments: Valid if limited to the perpetuity period. Re Hooper [1932] upheld maintenance of graves for the duration of the perpetuity period. Mussett v Bingle [1876] validated the erection of a monument but voided its maintenance trust for overstepping perpetuities.
Specific Animals: Valid as NCPTs for specific animals but not for public benefit. Examples include Pettingall v Pettingall (a black mare) and Re Dean (1889) ( $\pounds 750$ p/a for horses and hounds for $50$ years).
Exceptional Cases: Re Thompson (1934) upheld a bequest for fox hunting, though such cases would now face illegality hurdles.

Definition: Groups bound by mutual undertakings and rules, but lacking corporate status (Conservative Central Office v Burrell [1982]).
Transfer Methods: * Gift to Members: Treated as a gift to current members as co-owners (Leahy v AG for NSW). * Re Denley Principle: Valid if members form an identifiable group capable of enforcement (Re Lipinski’s Will Trust). * Contract-Holding Theory: The dominant method where property is held on trust for members subject to the association's contractual rules (Re Recher’s Will Trust [1972], Re Grant’s Will Trusts). * Bare Trust: Officers hold property for the benefit of members as defined by association terms (Hanchett-Stamford v AG).