//
archives

Sham trust

This category contains 17 posts

The curious story of the Angora cat

Para 438 in the decision of MezhProm Bank v Pugachev refers to a phenomenon in patent law known as the Angora cat problem first identified by Professor Franzosi, an eminent academic expert in the field: “Professor Mario Franzosi likens a patentee to an Angora cat. When validity is challenged, the patentee says his patent is … Continue reading

How afraid should we be of Clayton?

The Supreme Court decision in Clayton v Clayton changed the trust landscape.  But how afraid should we be?  Are all trusts vulnerable to Clayton-style challenge?  Or just the ones that push the envelope?  And, if the latter, how far can one push before there is a problem? A recent decision of Moore J has provided … Continue reading

Taxation of Trusts ed 3

  The taxation of trusts is a dynamic and ever-changing landscape. The third edition of Taxation of Trusts published this week (September 2016) has been up-dated to incorporate recent case law developments and legislative amendments.  The text also considers the application of FATCA to trusts and proposed new reforms to the disclosure rules and closely … Continue reading

The Supreme Court Writes Back

The long-awaited decision (issued in fact as two separate decisions) in Clayton v Clayton were released today (23 March 2016). The first decision relates to the Vaughan Road Property Trust (VRPT) and the second to the Claymark Trust. Background Mr and Mrs Clayton commenced a de facto relationship in 1986 and married in 1989. They … Continue reading

Dis-illusion

The long awaited Court of Appeal decision on the subject of illusory trusts should make unsettling reading for many a settlor, and perhaps their advisers too. The decision, which runs to 96 pages is substantial.  The message is mixed.  While the trust in question was found to be valid (illusion it turns out, is just … Continue reading

Round 7 and counting

Some cases will never settle.  Stokes v Insight Legal is one of them.  In this most recent trip to the High Court the defendants (Insight Legal et al) have sought leave to appeal the High Court decision Stokes v Insight Legal [2014] NZHC 2475.  This decision was largely procedural and related to matters that had … Continue reading

Do it right or don’t bother?

Trusts are a bit like plants – tend them and nourish them and you can reap the rewards for years.  Leave them alone and even if once well tended to, the plant can bolt or fail.  The story that became  Murrell v Hamilton provides a sad example of what can happen when trustees fail to collectively … Continue reading

Sham trust – a rose by any other name

Allegations of sham are commonly made, but rarely made out. Accordingly the case of Rosebud Corporate Trustee Limited v Bublitz makes interesting reading.  The judge does not keep us in suspense long, coming out with his finding at p. 5 that the trust is a sham. One of the major players in this story is one … Continue reading

Can a settlor have de facto control of a trust?

Trusts involve a lot of just that, trust.  Once settled, the settlor has limited, if any, real control.  This is difficult for many settlors to deal with due to misunderstandings and misinformation regarding how trusts work. By way of illustration – the earliest trusts, called a use, can be dated back to medieval England.  At … Continue reading

Trust Fundamentals Webinar

Trusts are the best long-term intergenerational form of asset protection.  However, as litigation involving trusts increases, questions are reasonably asked regarding the “safety” of trusts.  If you are looing for answers or guidance Vicki Ammundsen is presenting a webinar on February 19th discussing the fundamentals of trusts.  Topics covered by the webinar include: Requirements of a valid trust Differentiation between … Continue reading