Topic: Fiduciary Duties

Irwin Mitchell Trust Corporation v PW & anr [2024] WTLR 943

The claimant (a trust corporation) was appointed as deputy for property and financial affairs for the first defendant. The claimant instructed IMAM (an investment manager) to invest the first defendant’s funds. IMAM was part of the same corporate group as the claimant (IMAM was wholly owned by IMHL, and IMHL wholly owned IMLLP which wholly owned the claimant).

During a statutory will application, the Official Solicitor expressed concern about the appointment of IMAM. The court directed the claimant to apply for retrospective authority to instruct IMAM.

The claimant’s eviden...

Orb A.R.L & ors v Ruhan & ors [2022] WTLR 1049

The case concerned various agreements (including a sale purchase agreement, a headstay agreement and an alleged oral agreement) transacted between the claimants and the defendant (among others) in connection with a business venture. It was alleged that the oral agreement obliged the defendant to redevelop, restructure, manage and/or dispose of assets within a hotel portfolio in order to maximise the financial benefit realised from such assets, and then to pay a share of the net financial benefit from such activity to the claimants. The true intention behind the oral agreement was a matte...

In the matter of Various Lasting Powers of Attorney [2019] WTLR 1443

In 15 separate applications under s23(1) Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), the Public Guardian (PG) asked the court to determine the effect of language used in lasting powers of attorney which he was asked to register. Some were withdrawn, leaving 11. The common theme was that each instrument expressed an intention that the attorney use the donor ‘s assets to benefit someone other than the donor.

PS: Under the heading ‘Preferences ‘, the donor entered the words ‘The needs of [LS] before anyone else ‘. Under the heading ‘Instructions ‘, she entered the words ...

University of London v Prag & anr [2014] EWHC 3564 (Ch)

This decision concerned the construction of a trust deed dated 28 November 1944 (the deed) made between Eric Max Warburg on behalf of the Warburg family, Viscount Lee of Fareham on behalf of the Warburg Society, and the University of London (UOL). There arose questions about the scope of the deed, the ownership of property, the status of funding and the propriety of the administration by UOL under the deed. UOL brought a construction summons to determine these questions at the behest of HM Attorney General (the second defendant). The first defendant was Professor John Prag, of the Univer...

Spread Trustee Company Ltd v Hutcheson & ors [2011] UKPC 13

Privy Council (Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke and Sir Robin Auld)

The respondents made claims for breach of trust against the appellant in respect of breaches that occurred in Guernsey at a time when Guernsey customary law governed the duties of Guernsey trustees and also after the introduction of the Trusts (Guernsey) Law 1989 (the 1989 Law), but before that law was amended by the Trusts (Amendment) (Guernsey) Law 1990 (the 1990 Law). The trust instrument included an exoneration clause in respect of negligence by the trustee and ...