Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
AND IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLES 51 AND 53 OF THE TRUSTS (JERSEY) LAW 1984 (AS AMENDED).
The representor ("Investec") seeks the Court's blessing of its decision to widen the class of beneficiaries of The A Trust to include the remoter issue of the settlors. Investec has not surrendered its discretion to the Court and the application is therefore brought under the second category of cases set out in Re S Settlement 2001/154, namely where there is no doubt about the trustee's powers and how it has decided to exercise them but it is a particularly momentous decision.
The application is made against a background of hostility between the second respondents, who are the named beneficiaries of The A Trust (referred to at the hearing and in this judgment as "the siblings") on the one hand and Investec and John Kidd, who is the protector of the A Trust ("John Kidd") on the other.
(i) On behalf of Investec from Michael David Crouch and Dale McNutt (both officers of Investec), from Christopher Edward Lloyd (an original trustee of The A Trust) and from G (a former employee of the settlors).
(iii) On behalf of John Kidd from himself and from Robert Antony Clifford (a former officer of Investec).
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.