-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Oldfield v Oldfield relates to the trust consequences of a marriage breakup. Specifically, who should be the trustees when the settlors, who are also trustees, can no longer work together. Mrs Oldfield wishes to see Mr Oldfield removed as a trustee. Mr Oldfield’s view is that it is not appropriate to replace the trustees, rather the … Continue reading
The rule in Saunders v Vautier is generally well understood. However, the parameters of the rule are less clear. As noted in the Law Commission’s Third Issues Paper on the Review of the Law of Trusts “Perpetuities and the Revocation and Variation of Trusts”: The scope of the rule has become wider than merely allowing a … Continue reading
Central to the dispute in Roblin v Roblin is two brothers forced into co-trusteeship and co-ownership due to their joint appointment as executors and trustees of their mother’s estate. The main asset of the estate is a property lived in by one brother and a number of unrelated parties, the terms of whose tenure was … Continue reading
On first blush Kinney v Pardington appears to set the bar for Family Protection Act (FPA)claims at an almost unprecedented 70% in the context of one of three children claiming a breach of moral duty. However, when the facts are considered, the context of this case, may set it apart due to the very specific … Continue reading
On first glance Almond v Read, appears to have it all. Arguments were made relating to the parties common intention, a constructive trust and breaches of fiduciary duty in the context of family owned land that was acquired with best of intentions. However, over time, different parties adopted different views of the basis upon which a … Continue reading
Trusts can seem like a great idea. And then one day a settlor can be confronted with the reality of the loss of control and cast around for someone to blame. In addressing the realities of trust ownership, the exercise of powers of removal and appointment can offer a solution to issues with the dynamics between … Continue reading
Is a beneficiary more entitled to trust information pursuant to an application for discovery, rather than pursuant to a an application for disclosure? As a basic principle, courts do not permit discovery as a “fishing expedition.” However, as noted in Gavin v Powell at [41] “… the trustees’ obligations as to disclosure and a beneficiary’s right … Continue reading
The case of The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints Trust Board v CIR considers whether donations made in connection with a missionary application are charitable gifts for the purposes of s LD1 of the Income Tax Act 2007. The crux of the matter for consideration is whether gifts made by church members … Continue reading
It can be necessary to change trustees for many reasons. Regardless of the circumstances that require a change of trustee, the decision as to appropriate trustees can be complicated and requires a careful balancing of a range of considerations. The interim judgment in Thomson v Riley provides a useful insight into how a court balances … Continue reading
McLaughlin v McLaughlin relates to an application for a Beddoe Order by the trustee (Glasgow Harley Trustee Limited (Glasgow Harley) of the Ashley Trust (the Trust). Two beneficiaries of the Trust seek the removal of Glasgow Harley who they are also suing for breaches of trust. Glasgow Harley denies any wrong doing and seeks a … Continue reading
Matters of Trust 