Ellisons successfully represented the respondent, Edward Marcus, in the appeal brought by his brother, Jonathan Marcus, in respect of the High Court judgment from August 2024.
The original proceedings concerned a complex family trust set up by Stuart Marcus, holding valuable shares in the family business. Jonathan brought the original claim on the basis that he did not consider that Edward should be entitled to any of the trust assets if he was not Stuart’s biological child. Ellisons successfully represented Edward in this claim, arguing (amongst other points) that contextual factors surrounding the creation of the trust means that Edward should be a discretionary beneficiary of the same regardless of his paternity.
Jonathan appealed the High Court’s decision. Sir Anthony Mann, sitting as a judge of the High Court, heard the appeal on 24 June 2025. Sir Anthony Mann found that Master Marsh’s original judgment in favour of Edward was correct, agreeing with Master Marsh’s reasoning and commenting that, in the context of the family trust deeds, “Stuart chose to use a word (“children”) which, in the real world, described both Edward and Jonathan perfectly”. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and Edward remains a beneficiary of the trust.
This case highlights the importance contextual factors when interpreting trust deeds. Various factors including Stuart’s belief that Edward was his biological son, that both children were raised as part of the family unit, and that there was no reason for Stuart to have treated the brothers differently, were emphasised in both judges’ decisions to rule in favour of Edward.
Further information regarding this case can be found in our previous article here.
The full judgment from the original proceedings can be found here.
