//
archives

Beneficiaries

This category contains 63 posts

What do I want?

Bean v Bean is a an application to strike out a Family Protection Act 1955 (FPA) claim on the basis that it has no prospect of success.  The bar is set high for such a claim.  While any such claim will depend on its own facts, Bean v Bean is an interesting study of the procedural and tactical aspects … Continue reading

Highly unusual – or not?

In the Matter of the Representation of Scarlett Investment Holdings Limited addresses an application for rectification by a de facto trustee in circumstances where the settlor of three trusts settled by declarations of trust dated 23 February 1982 had died and the original trustee, a BVI private company was believed to have been struck off from … Continue reading

Beneficiary rights – never the twain shall meet

In Little v Howick Trustee DL Limited a beneficiary sought a review of trustee decisions and the removal of a court appointed trustee.  Perhaps surprisingly, considering the position taken in the Law Commission’s draft Trusts Bill and the Trusts Bill currently before Parliament regarding beneficiary rights,  Brewer J found that a discretionary beneficiary had no standing to seek a … Continue reading

Strangers and Beddoe orders

A Beddoe order (the name derives from the case Re Beddoe (Downes v Cottam))  is an order made by the court that permits trustees to incur expense on behalf of the trust filing or defending proceedings. A Beddoe order (if obtained) protects the trustees against claims by the beneficiaries that the action should not have been brought … Continue reading

Between a rock and a hard place

Mr Pratley was a Court appointed executor and trustee of two estates.  At the time of his appointment a 2-day hearing had already been set down to determine a claim against the prior executor and trustee.  The time-line is as follows: Mr Pratley’s appointment as executor and trustee – 20 October 2015 21 October 2015 Mr … Continue reading

David and Goliath?

Pertinent facts: On first blush Biggs v Biggs has the appearance of a David and Goliath style contest.   Nation J refers at [10] to the 2300 pages of documents that have had to be considered and at [11] notes that when claims are pursued “in a particular way, there can be scant recognition of the … Continue reading

Generosity can have its limits

A grandfather, Mr Greenwood, told his grandson that he could buy his house for $300,000 after his death. He expressed this wish to others, including his daughter (mother of the grandson) who was one of the executors of his estate, although it was not in his 2005 will. This occurred in Christchurch before the Earthquakes … Continue reading

The blessing of the court

Being a trustee is hard, and at times quite possibly boring (to paraphrase from the movie An Education: Emma Thompson and Carey Mulligan).  And worse, if you get it wrong the beneficiaries can sue you, no matter how hard a trustee might try to get it right. Fortunately, help is at hand in the form of … Continue reading

Trustees “fortunate” to be liable for only 50%

The Rex White Family Trust (RWFT) was found to have failed by reason of uncertainty. While the Court accepted it was appropriate for the trustees to have sought directions from the Court, it was found that they had acted unreasonably by pursuing an argument as to the existence of the RWFT, which was lacking in merit.  … Continue reading

Home is where the trust is?

The decision in Van Uden v CIR highlights the importance of recognising when a property owned by a trust can comprise a permanent place of abode.  The significance of a property being a permanent place of abode is that a person who is otherwise non-resident for tax purposes, will be treated as resident in New Zealand … Continue reading

Categories