Representation of Jasmine Trustees re Piedmont Trust and Riviera Trust [2018] JRC 210 (15 November 2018)

Representation of Jasmine Trustees re Piedmont Trust and Riviera Trust [2018] JRC 210 (15 November 2018)

The Court held that the daughter, as a discretionary beneficiary, had standing to challenge the revocation of the trusts on the grounds of undue influence and mistake. On the evidence, the revocation notices were executed by the settlors under undue influence exerted by the father, including threats and pressure, and should be set aside and declared invalid. The Court found no credible evidence to rebut the daughter's case and noted the absence of sworn evidence from the settlors or denials from the father.

Citation
[2018] JRC 210
Parties
Representor/trustee (p Trust): Jasmine Trustees Limited; Representor/trustee (r Trust): Lutea Trustees Limited; First Respondent/beneficiary: The Father; Second Respondent/beneficiary: The Daughter; Third Respondent/beneficiary: The Elder Son; Fourth Respondent/beneficiary: The Younger Son; Fifth Respondent/settlor (p Trust): P Settlor; Fifth Respondent/settlor (r Trust): R Settlor; Sixth Respondents/beneficiaries: Adult Beneficiaries
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
15 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Trustee Representation/originating Summons / Final Judgment on Directions Regarding Validity of Trust Revocation Notices
Outcome
Revocation notices set aside; directions granted in favour of the Trustees and the daughter.
Legal Topics
Revocation of Trusts, Undue Influence, Mistake, Beneficiary Standing, Trustee Duties
Trusts and Estates Equity Revocation of Trusts Undue Influence Mistake Beneficiary Standing Trustee Duties

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jasmine Trustees Limited

Representor/trustee (p Trust)

Lutea Trustees Limited

Representor/trustee (r Trust)

The Father

First Respondent/beneficiary

The Daughter

Second Respondent/beneficiary

The Elder Son

Third Respondent/beneficiary

The Younger Son

Fourth Respondent/beneficiary

P Settlor

Fifth Respondent/settlor (p Trust)

R Settlor

Fifth Respondent/settlor (r Trust)

Adult Beneficiaries

Sixth Respondents/beneficiaries

Procedural Posture

Trustee Representation/originating Summons / Final Judgment on Directions Regarding Validity of Trust Revocation Notices

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether revocation notices for the P Trust and R Trust should be set aside on grounds of undue influence and/or mistake
  2. 2 Whether a beneficiary has standing to challenge the exercise of a power of revocation by a settlor

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the daughter, as a discretionary beneficiary, had standing to challenge the revocation of the trusts on the grounds of undue influence and mistake. On the evidence, the revocation notices were executed by the settlors under undue influence exerted by the father, including threats and pressure, and should be set aside and declared invalid. The Court found no credible evidence to rebut the daughter's case and noted the absence of sworn evidence from the settlors or denials from the father.

Court Disposition

Revocation notices set aside; directions granted in favour of the Trustees and the daughter.

Orders

  • The revocation notices for the P Trust and R Trust are declared invalid and set aside on grounds of undue influence.
  • The Trustees are directed to disregard the revocation notices and continue to administer the trusts in accordance with their terms.