Quan v Bray & Ors

Judgment

Lady Justice King :

Introduction

This is an appeal against an order made by Sir Paul Coleridge sitting as Judge of the High Court whereby he declared that assets held within a Mauritian trust called the Chinese Tigers South African Trust (“ CTSAT ”) were not, for the purposes of section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 , a resource of either William Stuart Bray (“the husband”) or Li Quan (“the wife”). In the light of his findings of fact the Judge further declared that CTSAT is not a post-nuptial settlement.

On 3 October 2013, Mr Justice Coleridge (as he then was) ordered there to be a hearing, listed initially for 10 days, to enquire into the circumstances under which CTSAT was set up and the nature of its underlying purpose. Flowing from those findings, consideration was to be given as to the availability, to either the husband or the wife, of the funds held in the trust by virtue either of variation of a nuptial settlement (if one were held to exist), or as a ‘resource’ available to the parties and capable of being utilised to satisfy the wife’s claims within her financial remedy proceedings.

In the appeal before this court the wife seeks to overturn the Judge’s findings of fact by way of a “reasons challenge” directed at the judgment. The issue is whether the judgment fails adequately to give reasons for the findings of fact he made, his evaluation of those facts and the conclusions he reached so as to render that judgment unsustainable. In particular, the question arises as to whether, had certain specific issues been dealt with by the Judge in his judgment, his findings would have been such that this court would set aside his order and remit the case for a fresh trial.

Representation

Mr Richard Todd QC and Ms Mottahedan have represented the wife following the First Appointment, at which she was represented by Lewis Marks QC.

The husband has been largely unrepresented and has appeared in person in both the trial and in this appeal. The husband’s case however is the same as that of the charity at the heart of this litigation, SCT UK (Save Chinese Tigers), which is the sole named beneficiary of CTSAT . SCT UK was represented at trial by Mr Richard Harrison QC, Mr David Turner and Ms Samantha Ridley. On appeal SCT UK was represented by Mr David Thomas acting in person on behalf of the charity.

Shortly before the hearing of the appeal solicitors for the 6th Respondent, Conservation Finance Ltd (CFL), came on the record and have been