08.05.2014 Views

Soton Equity and Trusts - alastairhudson.com

Soton Equity and Trusts - alastairhudson.com

Soton Equity and Trusts - alastairhudson.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

4) Validity of exclusion clauses<br />

Reading: Hudson, section 8.5<br />

(a)<br />

The core principle<br />

**Armitage v. Nurse [1998] Ch 241, per Millett LJ:<br />

‘[T]here is an irreducible core of obligations owed by the trustees to the<br />

beneficiaries <strong>and</strong> enforceable by them which is fundamental to the<br />

concept of a trust. If the beneficiaries have no rights enforceable<br />

against the trustees there are no trusts. But I do not accept the further<br />

submission that there core obligations include the duties of skill <strong>and</strong><br />

care, prudence <strong>and</strong> diligence. The duty of trustees to perform the trusts<br />

honestly <strong>and</strong> in good faith for the benefit of the beneficiaries is the<br />

minimum necessary to give substance to the trusts, but in my opinion it<br />

is sufficient ... a trustee who relied on the presence of a trustee<br />

exemption clause to justify what he proposed to do would thereby lose<br />

its protection: he would be acting recklessly in the proper sense of the<br />

term.’<br />

Hayton, ‘The Irreducible Core Content of Trusteeship’, in Trends in Contemporary Trust<br />

Law (ed. A.J. Oakley, 1996), Ch.3.<br />

(b)<br />

Case law examples<br />

Bogg v Raper (1998/99) 1 ITELR 267<br />

Wight v Olswang (No.2) (1999/2000) 2 ITELR 689<br />

*Walker v Stones [2001] QB 902<br />

Barraclough v Mell [2005] EWHC 3387 (Ch), [2006] WTLR 203<br />

Baker v JE Clark & Co (Transport) UK Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 464<br />

(c)<br />

Gross negligence <strong>and</strong> questioning the central principle<br />

*Spread Trustee Ltd v Hutcheson [2010] WTLR 315, Guernsey Court of Appeal, as<br />

affirmed by the majority of the Privy Council [2011] UKPC 13, per Lord Kerr:<br />

“If, as I suggested at the beginning of this judgment, the placing of reliance<br />

on a responsible person to manage property so as to promote the interests<br />

of the beneficiaries of a trust is central to the concept of trusteeship,<br />

denying trustees the opportunity to avoid liability for their gross negligence<br />

seems to be entirely in keeping with that essential aim.”<br />

(C)<br />

Duty to invest.<br />

General Reading: Hudson, Ch9; Martin Ch18; Pettit Ch17<br />

See also, Hudson, The Law of Finance (Sweet & Maxwell,<br />

2009) Ch 7-12 on the regulation of investment.<br />

1) The power of investment under TA 2000<br />

*Trustee Act 2000, s 3(1)<br />

‘…a trustee may make any kind of investment that he could make if he were<br />

absolutely entitled to the assets of the trust.’<br />

2) The statutory duty of care<br />

**Trustee Act 2000, s.1<br />

‘(1) Whenever the duty under this subsection applied to a trustee, he must<br />

exercise such care <strong>and</strong> skill as is reasonable in the circumstances, having regard<br />

in particular –<br />

40

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!