Variation of trusts

Variation of trusts—variation of trusts without the court's assistance

As a general rule trustees are bound to carry out the settlor's wishes, however circumstances may arise where a variation is desirable, eg in the interests of efficient administration. In such cases the trustees will first consider whether a variation is possible without the assistance of the court, failing which the trustees will then turn to the court for assistance.

Express powers

The trust instrument may have been drafted so as to confer on the trustees powers wider than those contemplated by the general law. Modern trust instruments generally contrive to allow the trustees considerable discretionary powers. For example:

•
a power of appointment (this is a power given by one person to another to declare how property is to be held)
•
a power of advancement (this power enables trustees to pay or apply trust capital to or for the benefit of those entitled to the trust capital; the power may be given by the trust instrument or, subject to contrary intention, the power contained in section 32 of the Trustee Act 1925 (TA 1925))

The

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Private Client News

Private Client weekly highlights—21 November 2024

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) Wigglesworth v Beetson, in which the claimant failed in an action for estoppel and adverse possession; (2) the Hansard Society to host a briefing on parliamentary process for Assisted Dying Bill; (3) Khan v Khan, which considered family property and constructive trusts; (4) analysis of the Autumn Budget announcement to bring unused pension funds and death benefits within the scope of IHT; (5) Palmer v Sans, which found that there was no transaction at an undervalue where property was already held on trust for the transferee; (6) KA v FA (The Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening), where the court recognised an overseas adoption notwithstanding failure of common law test; and (7) Kireeva v Bedzhamov, in which the Supreme Court has confirmed the application of the immovables rule to English property.

HoL committee issues call for evidence on Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill

A Special Public Bill Committee established by the House of Lords has issued a call for evidence on the Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill. The deadline for submissions is Friday 20 December 2024.

Privy Council rules BVI company shares are not immovable property (Al Thani v Al Thani)

Private Client analysis: In a decision which will come as a relief to private individuals who own shares in BVI companies, the Privy Council has decided that section 245 of the BVI’s Business Companies Act 2004 does not have the effect of re-categorising shares as immovable property for the purposes of succession. Written by Kyle Bonnell, pupil at XXIV Old Buildings.

Supreme Court confirms application of immovables rule to English property

The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed Ms Kireeva’s (Russian bankruptcy trustee’s) appeal to overturn the Court of Appeal’s’ decision regarding matters arising out of the bankruptcy of Mr Bedzhamov. Peter Declercq and Patrick Elliot, partners at DCQ Legal (who acted for Ms Kireeva), discuss the implications of the judgment.