Re Harvard Securities [1997]

Re Harvard Securities Ltd [1997] EWHC 371 is an English trusts law case that addresses the certainty of subject matter in a trust. The case establishes that, under English law, clients can have a beneficial interest in shares without the need for segregation if there is an identifiable arrangement specifying the class and quantity of shares.

The liquidator of Harvard Securities Ltd, a stockbroking company, sought a determination under the Insolvency Act 1986 to ascertain whether the company or its clients held a beneficial interest in shares held by the company. The company bought blocks of Australian or US shares, selling them to clients in parcels. While the legal title remained with the company, it acted as a nominee for each client. However, the parcels were not individually registered in the clients' names. The company went insolvent, leading to a dispute over the clients' beneficial interest in the shares.

Neuberger J held that English law applied to the US shares, and the clients did have a beneficial interest in the shares. He rejected the need for segregation, relying on the principles established in Hunter v Moss [1994]. Neuberger J emphasised that, in principle, a valid declaration of trust could involve a percentage of shares held on trust, similar to the reasoning in Hunter v Moss [1994]. However, he noted that, in this case, unidentified shares in a class were treated as beneficial property. He concluded that if the correspondence had specified the number of shares, the clients would have had a beneficial interest. Consequently, the clients did have an interest in the US shares, and the liquidator was allowed to sell the shares and account to former clients pro rata.

Neuberger J addressed the distinction between Hunter v Moss [1994] and other cases, noting that Hunter v Moss [1994] was concerned with shares and not chattels. He argued that the shares in Hunter v Moss [1994] were treated similarly to a debt or fund, and this distinction influenced the decision. He further clarified that the description of shares as "an unascertained part of a mass of goods" did not fit cases involving shares, making the shares more comparable to a debt or fund.

Re Harvard Securities Ltd clarified the application of Hunter v Moss [1994] in cases involving shares, emphasising that the identification of shares by class and quantity in an arrangement could establish a beneficial interest without the need for segregation. The decision contributed to the understanding that the principles in Hunter v Moss [1994] extended beyond tangible property and were applicable to intangible property, such as shares, in certain circumstances.
Back to blog
UOLLB SQE Turbocharge

UOLLB SQE Turbocharge

Get ready for the SQE1 with high-performance SQE Study Guides developed by UOLLB, edited by lawyers, and published by UOL Press to revolutionise your study method and exam strategy.

Turbocharge SQE Performance

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 essential case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding.
Speed up your revision with us now👇

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Council of Europe
Crown Prosecution Service
Baker Mckenzie 
Yale University
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
INSEAD
University of London
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham
ESSEC Business School

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law

    Terminology

    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory

    Exam-focused

    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.