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.
(both on their own behalves and representing their own children and remoter issue)
(both on their own behalves and representing their own children and remoter issue)
This is an application for further directions in a matter upon which the Representor ("RBC") has been seeking the guidance of the Court since June 2007. This is however the first occasion upon which all of the beneficiaries have been convened. We summarise first the background.
RBC is trustee of three settlements settled by three brothers (now deceased); the settlements taking their names, viz. the B Settlement, the C Settlement and the D Settlement. The family of each brother are the principal beneficiaries of each settlement but there is, as Mr Cadin put it, cross-fertilisation in that to a greater or lesser extent, each family has a beneficial interest in the settlements of the other.
The assets of each of the settlements are held in the main through a jointly owned Jersey registered holding company called EE administered and controlled by RBC. EE has interests in a number of Irish companies which are managed and controlled by members of the D family, namely one or more of F, G and H ("the D Directors"). Any dividends received by EE from those Irish companies are passed on up to the settlements in equal shares.
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.