B v Erinvale PTC Limited and Ors 15-Oct-2020 [2020] JRC 213 (15 October 2020)

B v Erinvale PTC Limited and Ors 15-Oct-2020 [2020] JRC 213 (15 October 2020)

The Court held that Erinvale's decision not to add B as a beneficiary in her own right at this time was not one that no reasonable trustee could have made, nor was it shown that Erinvale failed to consider relevant factors or was improperly influenced by conflict. The Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 51 does not permit it to substitute its own discretion for that of the trustee unless the trustee's decision is perverse or improperly made. B remains a beneficiary as C's spouse and is financially supported; Erinvale has indicated it would consider adding her as a beneficiary in her own right if C died before ancillary relief is resolved. The application is therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2020] JRC 213
Parties
Applicant/representor: B; Settlor/respondent: C; Trustee/respondent: Erinvale PTC Limited; Intervenor: E; Intervenor: F
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
15 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Trust/ancillary Relief Application / Judgment on Application to Add Beneficiary to Trust
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Discretionary Trusts, Addition of Beneficiaries, Matrimonial Proceedings, Jurisdiction of Court Under Article 51 Trusts (jersey) Law 1984, Conflict of Interest in Trustees, Supervisory Jurisdiction of Court Over Trustees
Trusts Family Law Discretionary Trusts Addition of Beneficiaries Matrimonial Proceedings Jurisdiction of Court Under Article 51 Trusts (jersey) Law 1984 Conflict of Interest in Trustees Supervisory Jurisdiction of Court Over Trustees

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B

Applicant/representor

C

Settlor/respondent

Erinvale PTC Limited

Trustee/respondent

E

Intervenor

F

Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Trust/ancillary Relief Application / Judgment on Application to Add Beneficiary to Trust

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trustee's refusal to add B as a beneficiary in her own right was reasonable
  2. 2 Whether the Court should intervene in the exercise of trustee discretion under Article 51 of the Trusts (Jersey) Law 1984
  3. 3 Whether any conflict of interest vitiated the trustee's decision

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that Erinvale's decision not to add B as a beneficiary in her own right at this time was not one that no reasonable trustee could have made, nor was it shown that Erinvale failed to consider relevant factors or was improperly influenced by conflict. The Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 51 does not permit it to substitute its own discretion for that of the trustee unless the trustee's decision is perverse or improperly made. B remains a beneficiary as C's spouse and is financially supported; Erinvale has indicated it would consider adding her as a beneficiary in her own right if C died before ancillary relief is resolved. The application is therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • B is not to be added as a beneficiary in her own right at this time
  • No order for variation of the A Settlement