On 27 September 1929, Colonel Patrick Young CBE executed a trust deed, which set out three main purposes. The first of those was the payment of the annual income of the trust fund "to or for behoof of my said children and the survivors and survivor of them equally among them....for their alimentary use...and for their maintenance, education and upbringing". His children were to receive an alimentary liferent until, in the case of sons, they came of age, or, in the case of daughters, they married. At that point they were each to receive capital of £4,000, to support the sons at the outset of their careers and provide the daughters with a dowry. Once all the surviving children had received their capital payment, any remaining balance was to be distributed among the survivors.

At the time when he executed the trust deed, the trustor had six children, and no further children were born. The trustor died in 1951. All three of the trustor’s sons reached the age of majority. All had died at the time of the action, without leaving any issue. Two daughters married and remained living. A third daughter never married, but died in 2007. 

The court heard a special case on whether the balance of the trust funds should now be distributed following the death of the trustor’s unmarried daughter in 2007. It was noted that this would leave the balance of the trust funds payable in equal share to the trustor’s two surviving married daughters. An alternative view was advanced that the purpose in question would have no application, since the trustor's surviving children did not all attain majority in the case of sons, or marry in the case of daughters. On that view, the balance of the trust fund would be payable to the trustor's executors, to be distributed as part of his estate in accordance with his will.

In rejecting this latter argument, the court noted the basic purposes of the trust were clear. Evidently, the trustor intended his children to enjoy an income until they came of age, in case of sons, or married, in the case of daughters. At that point, they would lose the income, but would receive a lump sum. Once the surviving children were all of age, or all married, the trust would be wound up and any balance of the funds distributed. That is because the earlier trust purposes would be exhausted once there was no surviving child who might yet satisfy the conditions for entitlement to a share of capital. That situation came about upon the trustor’s daughter’s death. The court noted that so long as she was alive, she was entitled to income until her marriage; and she might yet marry and become entitled to capital. Once she had died, all the surviving children were daughters who had married, and that therefore, the trust purpose in question (distribution of the balance of trust funds) applied.