-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
V Trustees Limited (the Trustee) was concerned to protect the position of C who was the beneficiary of a trust much diminished due to the actions of her litigious brother, A, whose conduct had caused substantial losses with “no signs of the attacks abating.” The matter came before the Jersey Royal Court on an application … Continue reading
Kermit the frog sang “It’s not easy being green.” It’s not always that easy being a beneficiary either. The Sesame Workshop advises that the song is about “… knowing who you are, realizing your own worth and dignity, and becoming more content and comfortable within yourself.” Whether this will help any beneficiaries of discretionary trusts … Continue reading
Bundz v Anderson is a costs decision of Associate Judge Lester. The background of the matter, relates to a claim that was brought pursuant to the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction relating to an error made by one trustee of the LC Craighead Family Trust (the Trust), who mistakenly believed that a property in Timaru (the … Continue reading
Rawson v Prescott, which relates to an unsuccessful application for summary judgment on a claim for vacant possession of trust property raises more questions than it answers. The key issue relates to whether trustees are bound to an agreement for the purposes of section 21 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976, that the trustees were … Continue reading
In New Zealand Beddoe applications are governed in the first instance by the High Court Rules, which do not extend to prospective costs orders by beneficiaries. Representation of VG Trustee Limited re the B Trust (Re the B Trust) considers whether beneficiaries should have their costs met on account of a successful Beddoe application brought … Continue reading
Kain v Public Trust relates to an application for disclosure of a deed that brought forward the distribution date of the Te Mata Property Trust (the Trust). This deed distributed the entirety of the Trust’s assets and had the effect of terminating certain beneficial interests. The background of the matter is set out in [4] … Continue reading
It is not uncommon for will-makers to specify the age at which beneficiaries are to benefit. The question is, if the beneficiaries have capacity, must they wait? Telford v Telford answers this question by reference to the rule in Saunders v Vautier, and more latterly section 121 of the Trusts Act 2019. By way of … Continue reading
Ryan v Lobb relates to the interpretation of a resettlement clause contained in the deed of trust for the Lothbury Trust (the Trust) that expressly provided for a resettlement on written notice in the event that the Settlors separated, or their marriage was legally dissolved. Such notice was given by Ms Ryan in 2017 following … Continue reading
Disclosure requests in the context of trusts, wills and estate can raise complex issues that can require the assistance of the court to resolve, particularly following the introduction of the Trusts Act 2019 and before the expected case law that will be realised in due course. However, in some cases it is simply a matter … Continue reading
The background of this matter is set out as follows in Cooke J’s judgment: In Armani v Armani Walker J considered the threshold for the appointment of a receiver in the following terms at [86]: My view is that the ordinary meaning of “reasonable necessity” does not precisely equate with a measure of “last resort” … Continue reading
Matters of Trust 