Re Peers relates to a trust with a 32 year vesting date that is now somewhat inconvenient due to the nature of the trust’s assets and a tax liability that will be incurred on the vesting day. The solution proposed was an amendment to the vesting date. Osborne J saw no detriment on behalf of who the court was approving the variation pursuant to section 124 of the Trusts Act 2019.
Importantly, all of the adult beneficiaries approved the variation, meaning that the only matter for the court to consider was approval on behalf of minors, beneficiaries lacking capacity and future beneficiaries.
The judgment did not explain why the trust in question had such a short vesting day. However, as the varied date was 125 years from the date the trust was settled, it is presumed that the somewhat abbreviated trust period was not the result of earlier settlements onto the trust.
Vicki Ammundsen considered the approach taken in Re Peers in Trust Series 2023 – Variation of Trusts.
Also see McCallum v McCallum where the High Court approved a 10 year extension to the vesting day on behalf of future spouses and future grandchildren and great grandchildren pursuant to s 124 of the Trusts Act to “… allow the trustees to better manage tax and other practical complications that would arise should the vesting date not be extended.”
References
- Re Peers [2023] NZHC 2120
- Re Jury Family Trusts [2022] NZHC 568
- Trusts Act 2019, sections 122, 124
- McCallum v McCallum [2024] NZHC 2884
Matters of Trust 
Discussion
No comments yet.