Australia

You must sign in before downloading any documents from the international trust cases

Cases :

AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENT COMMISSION V DRAKE (NO.2)
- A trustee’s duty of care may be excluded by the trust instrument AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENT COMMISSION V DRAKE (NO.2)Download
BADENACH v CALVERT
- Duty of a solicitor drawing up a will did not extend to advising testator of avoidance devices to counter possible statutory claim.BADENACH v CALVERTDownload
BEALE V. TRINKLER[2008] NSWSC 347
- The self-dealing rules do not prevent a trustee from purchasing a beneficiary’s interest in trust property, but the fair dealing rules apply to the purchaser.BEALE V. TRINKLERDownload
BURTON, RE[1994] FCA 557
- A bankrupt had a power to appoint and dismiss trustees of a discretionary family trust. His trustee in bankruptcy claimed that the power vested in him as “property” of the bankrupt.BURTON, REDownload
COMISSIONER OF STATE REVENUE v ROJODA PTY LTD[2020] HCA 7
- Partnership property is held by the legal owners or trustees for the partnership, not for the partners.COMISSIONER OF STATE REVENUE v ROJODA PTY LTDDownload
HARTIGAN NOMINEES V. RYDGE29 NSWLR 405
- In the course of over 40 pages, the three judges cover a good deal of ground, but the essential question was whether a discretionary beneficiary was entitled to see the memorandum of wishes. Two of the judges held not: it seems they were much swayed by the fact that the memorandum had been provided to the trustees on a confidential basis. (A tip for the draftsman, here.)The Court is essentially following Re Londonderry’s Settlement (infra); but it might not be unreasonable to suppose that what the dissenting judge has to say about the shortcomings of that decision could fall on sympathetic ears in some offshore jurisdictions.HARTIGAN NOMINEES V. RYDGEDownload
LEWIS v CONDON[2013] NSWCA 204
- A transaction is not a sham just because it has an improper motive.LEWIS v CONDONDownload
PUBLIC TRUSTEE v. BENNETT AND ANR7 ITELR 392
- This illustrates the way the Court approaches a badly-drafted will and is a triumph of common sense. The case is also interesting because it was decided by a former ITPA member.PUBLIC TRUSTEE v. BENNETT AND ANRDownload
ROTHMORE FARMS v. BELGRAVIA2 ITELR 159
- This was a business trust which got into difficulties. The family tried various manoeuvres to avoid its liabilities, but were (quite rightly) unsuccessful.ROTHMORE FARMS v. BELGRAVIADownload
ROUSE v. IOOF AUSTRALIA TRUSTEES2 ITELR 289
- An interesting case on an important subject. Does a beneficiary have a right to inspect trust documents? The Court explains that the beneficiary’s right is subject to the discretion of the trustees.ROUSE v. IOOF AUSTRALIA TRUSTEESDownload
SEGELOV v ERNST YOUNG SERVICE PTY LTD[2014] NSWSC 283
- This trustee of a discretionary trust has no duty to explain to a beneficiary what her rights are.SEGELOV v ERNST YOUNG SERVICE PTY LTDDownload
SPELLSON v GEORGE(1987) 11 NSWLR 300
- Where the trustee must consider whether or not to exercise a power, but is not obliged to exercise it at all, is the object of the power entitled to information about the trust investments? The decisions in Rosewood (Isle of Man) and Manisty (England) indicate that he is not. This case, following Chaine-Nickson (Ireland) – which is cited in the judgement – indicates that he is.SPELLSON v GEORGEDownload
YU[2013] QSC 322
- A document on an iPhone can constitute a will and be registered as such.YUDownload
YUNGHANNS v. CANDOORA3 ITELR 154
- The judgment contains a useful review of the cases (mostly from the United Kingdom) concerning the appointment of a receiver in place of trustees.YUNGHANNS v. CANDOORADownload