Breach of Trust Claims

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susannah Meadway
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
The Common ◽  
Trust Property

A trust instrument will set out the trustee’s powers and duties in relation to the management, administration, and distribution of trust property. Certain further powers and duties may be imposed by statute or have been developed in the common law. Trustees must comply with these duties, and act properly in the exercise (or non-exercise) of their powers. Where they do not comply with their duties, whether because they act in direct contravention of them or because they improperly omit to act at all, they may be held liable for breach of trust. Similarly, where they act in excess of their powers, or in certain cases improperly fail to exercise their powers at all, they may be guilty of a breach of trust. Breaches of trust can therefore be of many different kinds. They may include:

1. Foundations

2020 ◽  
pp. 3-32
Author(s):  
Gary Watt
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common ◽  
Special Concern ◽  
Trust Property ◽  
Court Of Chancery ◽  
Conceptual Foundations ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Historical Origins

This chapter focuses on the historical and conceptual foundations of trusts and equity, first examining the history of the relationship between law and equity, including the historical origins of the trust. It then explains the idea of equity and how it is intertwined with the common law, and compares the trust with concepts such as gifts and contracts. The chapter shows that the trust arose in response to equity’s special concern to ensure that legal rights are not used in bad conscience, but later developed into a sophisticated institution governed by established rules. It looks at the reform of the Court of Chancery and considers trust property, equitable rights under a trust, separation of legal and equitable title, and the paradox of property and obligation.

RECONCEPTUALISING THE EXPRESS TRUST

2002 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 657-683 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Parkinson
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Specific Subject ◽  
Core Content ◽  
Beneficial Ownership ◽  
The Common ◽  
Trust Property ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Irreducible Core ◽  
Traditional Understanding

This article argues that the express trust should be understood as a species of obligation rather than as a means of organising the ownership of property. Two propositions seem fundamental to the traditional understanding of the trust as an aspect of property law. Firstly, in the nature of the trust, there must be a separation of legal and beneficial ownership. Secondly, there must be trust property. Neither is necessarily true. With many discretionary trusts and other recognised types of express trust it is impossible to locate the beneficial estate. Furthermore, the requirement for there to be trust property is, on closer analysis, a requirement of certainty of obligation in relation to specific subject-matter within which the trust property can be located.The article explores the implications of understanding the trust as a species of obligation. It allows all express trusts, including charitable trusts, to be explained as resting on the same fundamental concepts. The trust in the common law world may still be distinguished from contract and from the civil law forms of the trust. This new conceptualisation also illuminates what is the irreducible core content of the trust. The article concludes with a new definition of the express trust.

scholarly journals Trust and Patrimony

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 379-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lionel D. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Legal Person ◽  
Fundamental Change ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Personal Rights ◽  
The Common ◽  
Trust Property

The French jurist Pierre Lepaulle argued that the common law trust could be best understood, in civilian terms, as a patrimony by appropriation. This argument has been influential in some civilian receptions of the trust. In fact, Lepaulle misunderstood the nature of the common law trust, which is founded on the obligations owed by the trustee in relation to the trust property. The rights of beneficiaries in the common law trust are neither purely personal rights against the trustee, nor are they real rights in the trust property, but rather they are rights over the rights which the trustee holds as trust property; they have a proprietary character since they persist against many third party transferees of the trust property. This analysis of the common law trust leads to the conclusion that it would be a fundamental change to turn the common law trust into a legal person. More generally, it is argued that any legal system that characterizes the trust as a legal person will find that it has ceased to understand the trust as a fundamental legal institution.

Trust and Patrimony

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lionel D Smith
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Direct Access ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
The Common ◽  
Trust Property

This chapter examines whether the common law trust can be understood as a patrimony in the civilian sense. It begins with a discussion of Pierre Lepaulle's claim that the common law trust is a patrimony affected to a destination or purpose. It then considers the situation of creditors and beneficiaries in a common law trust before advancing the argument that, contrary to the position taken by Lepaulle, the common law trust is not a patrimony. It contends that only trustees have direct access to the trust assets; trust creditors, and even beneficiaries, do not. It also asserts that the essence of the common law trust lies not in any division of ownership of the trust property, but in the fact that the trust beneficiaries hold rights in the rights that the trustee holds as trust property. The chapter concludes by relating the trust institution to the idea of legal personality.

18. Tracing

2019 ◽  
pp. 430-456
Author(s):  
Gary Watt
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Knowledge ◽  
Key Points ◽  
The Common ◽  
Trust Property ◽  
Bank Accounts ◽  
Personal Liability

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Trustees have personal liability in an action for compensation or account. If the action proves worthless in practice because the trustees are impecunious or have been declared bankrupt, and hence cannot repay trust monies to the fund, the beneficiaries may be able to trace the value of their trust property into bank accounts and into assets that have been bought with the trust property. It is the value of the trust property, not the precise item of the property itself, which is sought or traced in most cases. Tracing is a process that gives rise to the ultimate remedy of recovering misapplied money or property. This chapter examines tracing and the limits to common law tracing, the distinction between proprietary remedies and personal remedies, and how the rules for tracing in equity may be applied to unmixed funds, mixed funds and assets purchased with such funds. It also discusses the artificiality of the distinction between common law and equitable tracing rules, defences to the common law restitutionary claim and advantages of proprietary rights.

18. Tracing

2021 ◽  
pp. 426-452
Author(s):  
Gary Watt
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Knowledge ◽  
Key Points ◽  
The Common ◽  
Trust Property ◽  
Bank Accounts ◽  
Personal Liability

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Trustees have personal liability in an action for compensation or account. If the action proves worthless in practice because the trustees are impecunious or have been declared bankrupt, and hence cannot repay trust monies to the fund, the beneficiaries may be able to trace the value of their trust property into bank accounts and into assets that have been bought with the trust property. It is the value of the trust property, not the precise item of the property itself, which is sought or traced in most cases. Tracing is a process that gives rise to the ultimate remedy of recovering misapplied money or property. This chapter examines tracing and the limits to common law tracing, the distinction between proprietary remedies and personal remedies, and how the rules for tracing in equity may be applied to unmixed funds, mixed funds and assets purchased with such funds. It also discusses the artificiality of the distinction between common law and equitable tracing rules, defences to the common law restitutionary claim and advantages of proprietary rights.

Square Peg, Round Hole? Patrimony and the Common Law Trust

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Matthews
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Round Hole ◽  
Full Flowering ◽  
The Common ◽  
Trust Property

This chapter examines the relation between the doctrine of patrimony and the common law trust. Patrimony derives from the notion of personality. The doctrine reached its full flowering with the French nineteenth-century work of Charles Aubry and Frédéric-Charles Rau. After discussing the difficulties that arise from the notion that patrimony has particular importance in relation to the rights of creditors and of heirs, the chapter considers the significance of patrimony to the question of succession. In particular, it analyses the transmission of economic personality to the heirs. It also describes various uses of patrimony in relation to trusts before revisiting the English case Jennings v Mather. Finally, it looks at the implications of a trustee's death for patrimony, the Scottish law on trusts, dealings with trust property, and why a patrimonial approach to trusts should be adopted.

1. Foundations

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Watt
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common ◽  
Special Concern ◽  
Trust Property ◽  
Court Of Chancery ◽  
Conceptual Foundations ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Historical Origins

This chapter focuses on the historical and conceptual foundations of trusts and equity, first examining the history of the relationship between law and equity, including the historical origins of the trust. It then explains the idea of equity and how it is intertwined with the common law, and compares the trust with concepts such as gifts and contracts. The chapter shows that the trust arose in response to equity's special concern to ensure that legal rights are not used in bad conscience, but later developed into a sophisticated institution governed by established rules. It looks at the reform of the Court of Chancery and considers trust property, equitable rights under a trust, separation of legal and equitable title, and the paradox of property and obligation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document