Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Facts  





2 Judgment  





3 See also  





4 Notes  





5 References  














Re London Wine Co (Shippers) Ltd







Add links
 









Article
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Cite this page
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
Wikidata item
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 


Re London Wine Shippers Ltd
CourtHigh Court
Citation[1986] PCC 121
Keywords
Trusts

Re London Wine Shippers [1986] PCC 121 is an English trusts law case, concerning the necessity of ascertaining assets subject to a trust. It has been distinguished by Hunter v Moss,[1] and Re Harvard Securities Ltd,[2] and may not be consistent with the general policy of insolvency law as seen in Re Lehman Brothers International (Europe).

Facts

[edit]

Unsecured creditors of a bankrupt wine trading company, London Wine Shippers Ltd, argued that they should be able to claim the bottles of wine they had paid for. The fine wine company had gone into receivership, and the remaining wine stock was a valuable asset. The bottles that the customers had bought had not yet been individually identified. The company had not even promised to provide wine from its current stocks.[3]

Judgment

[edit]

Oliver J held that even if the company had said the wine was to come from current stocks, the trust would in any event have been uncertain. There could be no award for specific performance because the Sale of Goods Act required similarly that any goods be ascertained. In the course of his judgment, Oliver J said as follows.[4]

I appreciate the point taken that the subject matter is a part of a homogeneous mass so that specific identity is of as little as importance as it is, for instance, in the case of money. Nevertheless, as it seems to me, to create a trust it must be possible to ascertain with certainty not only what the interest of the beneficiary is to be but to what property it is to attach. I cannot see how, for instance, a farmers who declares himself to be a trustee of two sheep (without identifying them) can be said to have created a perfect and complete trust… And it would seem to me to be immaterial that at the time he has a flock of sheep out of which he could satisfy the interest.

Any alleged constructive or express trust of 50 bottles because the subject matter of the trust would be uncertain, at least until 50 specific bottles were set aside for the customers.

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ [1993] EWCA Civ 11
  • ^ [1997] EWHC Comm 371
  • ^ [1986] PCC 121
  • ^ [1986] PCC 121
  • References

    [edit]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Re_London_Wine_Co_(Shippers)_Ltd&oldid=1083101170"

    Category: 
    English trusts case law
    Hidden category: 
    Use dmy dates from April 2022
     



    This page was last edited on 17 April 2022, at 01:24 (UTC).

    Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



    Privacy policy

    About Wikipedia

    Disclaimers

    Contact Wikipedia

    Code of Conduct

    Developers

    Statistics

    Cookie statement

    Mobile view



    Wikimedia Foundation
    Powered by MediaWiki