Types of Trusts: Express, Resulting, and Constructive Trusts
Mary's estate includes a trust for her children, Luke and Jessica; however, her sisters, Tama and Tessa, control the trust. Among the issues that this analysis can identify are violations of fiduciary responsibilities, the suitability of specific investments, the state of designated property, and the ability to satisfy the estate's requests. Upon the demise of Mary, the property was passed to Tama and Tessa with the legal responsibility of passing on the property to Luke and Jessica. The rationale for this trust was to cater to the beneficiaries' accommodation and other expenses. However, certain actions taken by the trustees have given rise to technical legal questions related to conflicts of interest, investment decisions, fiduciary duties, and the management of estate assets—issues for which an Assignment Helper can provide clear analysis and suggestions to both beneficiaries and trustees.
Discussion
Issue
Possible conflict of interest and negligence on the part of Tama and Tessa. This issue occurs based on the conducts of the trustees with regard to the management and/or disposal of the trust property. More so, key issues are as follows: Procurement of a sapphire necklace by Tama most especially from the trust and appointment of Tessa as a director in a firm where the trust has stakes. The common question is whether these actions constitute a violation of the trustees' fiduciary responsibilities, primarily the duty of loyalty and the duty of impartiality in relation to the beneficiaries, Luke and Jessica.
Thus, the case arises where the trustees participate in other dealings of trust property for private gains hence raises the issue of conflict of interest. So when Tama buys the necklace as Edda had valued it, those transactions are now raising the issue of impropriety[1]. Likewise, a director's fee received by Tessa from a firm in which the trust has a significant investment exposes a conflict of interest since it may affect decisions made by a trustee. These actions can only be examined to conclusion to establish if they are lawful in consideration with the trustees' obligations, or unlawful that would be disadvantageous to the beneficiaries in this case.
Rule
Get assistance from our PROFESSIONAL ASSIGNMENT WRITERS to receive 100% assured AI-free and high-quality documents on time, ensuring an A+ grade in all subjects.
Under Uk law, Trustees bear the duty of loyalty, to act in good faith and to avoid conflicts of interest which is mainly governed by the Trustee Act 2000. There are guidelines that pertain to the duties of a trustee as laid out in the Trustee Act 2000; as per these guidelines, it is crucial for trustees to exercise reasonable care, and exercise discretion in the best interest of the beneficiaries. Originally, trustees were obliged to administer the given trust property wisely and to refrain from any actions that would generate possible conflict of interest or personal profit.
Section 1 of the Trustee Act 2000 integrates the duty of care making the trustee answerable for applying the reasonable care customary in any situation depending on the special wisdom and vocation that the trustee undergoes or represents itself to have[2]. Moreover, the no-conflict and no-profit rules, developed through the case law, extend that trustees shall not find themselves in the situation, where a conflict of interest may occur and prevent the beneficiary's interests, and trustees shall not gain any financial benefits being in the trustees' position without prior permission.
The element and doctrine of loyalty is among the most well-established in the law of trusts: it is breached where the trustee fails to act for the sole purpose of the beneficiaries' interest. This duty prohibits the serving of the trustees from entering into transactions that are detrimental to the interests of the trust or benefit them in some way if it is not provided for under the terms of the trust deed or confirmed by the beneficiaries[3]. The rule against conflict of interest is particularly strict, and which means that trustees are prohibited from assuming the responsibilities which could put them in the conflicts of interest.
Application
Tama bought sapphire necklace from the said trust. Despite the fact that she was willing to pay the amount reflected in the higher valuation, her purchase to herself may be in violation of Section 1 of the Trustee Act 2000[4]. Receipt of £20,000 director's fees when Tessa is also a director and running of other business by Max amount to unlawful gain under the same act.
These rules are as follows: An application of these rules to the case of the purchase of the sapphire necklace by Tama for Tima suggests that there is conflict of interest since the company was a director of the supplier. Nonetheless, Tama paid a higher valuation, she is a trustee and thus she cannot benefit herself from purchasing trust property as it is a clear conflict of interest between her and the beneficiaries. This transaction could be considered as a conflict of interest which in most circumstances are unlawful unless approved by the terms of the trust or the beneficiaries.
Likewise, £20,000 obtained by Tessa in director's fees from the Country Craft Limited, which is acquired by the trust, may also be a breach of the law. This dual capacity increases the possibility that a trustee inadequately serves the company's interest since a director at the same time may be driven by self-interests[5]. This case is a clear illustration of a conflict of interest since Tessa's loyalty to act for the best interest of the trust may be soiled by the remunerative benefits accorded to her.
No-profit rule is also important here. While serving as a trustee, an individual is not allowed to collect a fee unless allowed to do so. It was earlier identified that Tessa accepted the director's fees which could be considered to be against this rule as it could portray that she is utilizing her position in order to make money for herself. Some may regard this action as exploitation of her position to manipulate the trust's objectives and exploit the beneficiaries' faith in her neutrality.
5 Years | PhD
Conclusion
Luke and Jessica may have basis for an action against Tama and Tessa that they have committed breach of fiduciary duties. That Tama bought the necklace without clear authorization or consultation for the benefit of the organization when she was involved in the deal could be considered as conflict of interest and possible negligence Similarly Tessa receiving director's fees when the company was in trouble could have been seen as conflict of interest and negligence. It is quite possible that these activities require further investigation and probably – legal measures to prevent the management of the trust in a way that is detrimental to the beneficiaries' interest and UK trust law. The beneficiaries could wish to sue for these actions and depending on the result could include orders to return the necklace to the trust and the director to pay back the fees that he has been receiving.
Issue
Most agree that to be considered suitable, the trustees' investment decisions must be prudent. The first question here is whether both of them, namely Tama and Tessa as the trustees of the Trust for Luke and Jessica, have properly and appropriately taken investment decisions that would reflect their duty to act in the best interest of the beneficiaries. The attention is paid to the expediency of purchasing houses and acquiring shares in a private company and the possible conflicting self-interests related to these actions.
Rule
Trustees need to invest wisely with the view of diversification and the suitability of the investment as provided under Section 3 of the Trustee Act 2000. Section 3 of the Trustee Act 2000 puts a duty on a trustee to exercise in the management of the trust's affairs such care and skill as may be expected of a man of business acting on his own affairs and should also have regard to any special knowledge or experience which he has, or possesses, in relation to the affairs of the trust[6]. The act also stresses on the fact that investments have risks and so trustees need to ensure that they invest in many portfolios so that in case one portfolio has risks the trustees and the beneficiaries will not be heavily affected, secondly the investment made should be one that is suitable for the trust. Section 1 of the bill also imposes the general duty of care which requires a trustee to manage the assets of the trust in the same manner that anyone holding a like position would manage their own property in relation to the trust's financial affairs.
Application
Buying houses in Leicester for the beneficiaries' occupation and acquirement of houses in France for rental purposes seem to be realistic. But at the same time the acquisition of 60% of shares in Country Crafts Limited as well as Tessa becoming a director causes the problems of appropriate inappropriateness and potential conflict of interest under the same act[7].
The acquisition of houses in Leicester and France can therefore be regarded as wise decisions to have made. The house in Leicester is also helping the beneficiaries have a steady home to live in, while the house in France could also be seen as an investment house that could be let out thus a diversification of the trust assets, stability and growth. Such decisions make sense when understanding the main and secondary responsibilities of the trustees who are to invest wisely and take into account the needs of the beneficiaries in the present and the future.
However, the purchase share of 60% in Country Crafts Limited increases a lot of risks in the organization and it claims about the suitability and diversified portfolio of the trust. This investment may not possess sufficient diversification because it focuses a major portion of the trust's assets in a single, possibly risky company. The problem with the trustees' resolve to invest most of the funds for the pie in a single private firm rather than invest in many securities and assets could be seen as risky under principles provided in the case of Cowan v Scargill [1985] Ch 270 where the speculation that the trustees entered into were held to be detrimental to the interests of the beneficiaries.
This problem is even magnified by Tessa holding the position of a director in Country Crafts Limited. There is a clear conflict of interest, as she is at the same time the trustee and the company director, which means that her duties to the company may contradict the trust[8]. This situation could lead to decisions that are in the best interest of the company as opposed to the benefits of the trust hence fail to uphold the trustees' fiduciary duties to the beneficiaries. That is why conflict in such matters as was illustrated in the case of Re Macadam [1946] Ch 73 is very dangerous and this is because the trustees must not derive any benefit out of the same position unless so permitted by the trust deed or by the beneficiaries.
Conclusion
Luke and Jessica could also question the trustees' decisions on investment on the basis of safeguarding and appropriateness principles. The purchase of houses in Leicester and France seems reasonable, and it complies with the legal provisions on trust. However, the highly significant investment in Country Crafts Limited and Tessa holding directorship positions in this and other companies causes questions to arise about the company's strategy on diversification and conflicts of interest. The beneficiaries may have legal bases on these decisions, stressing the importance of the prudence of the trustee and the avoidance of any conduct that threatens the solvency of the trust and the loyalty of the trustees.
Issue
Location of the antique desk as a piece of property, and the various other conditions of the promissory note. However, there is still the question of whether Mary's intentions were enough to pass the ownership of the desk and debt legally.
Rule
In general it is considered that to make a gift valid, the following essentials are real intention coupled with delivery of the gift and acceptance by the recipient[9]. The common law principles must be followed regarding the assignment of debts in which the debtor must be informed. Besides, legal formalities regarding conveyance that are stipulated in the Law of Property Act 1925, must also be complied with.
Application
Mary orally transferred the desk to Hong but in essence, never released the item. The note signed by DU and Florence and passed on to Hong to collect Lucy's debt cannot operate to assign the debt legally since doing so without notifying Lucy violates the Law of Property Act, 1925 Section 136, the rules governing assignments[10].
The usual essentials for a gift to be valid are: intention to make a gift, delivery of the gift and acceptance by the offeree. In Re Cole [1964] Ch 175, the court stated that for the title in the goods to pass from the buyer to the seller, it has to be accompanied by physical delivery of the goods. Even though Mary told everyone that she would give Hong the gift of the desk, there was no physical gesture of gifting the item, thus, the gifting process was not properly consummated. Thus, it is not given to Robert but stays with Mary as her property; thus, it becomes a part of her estate.
In relation to the assignment of the debt, according to the Law of Property Act 1925 Section 136 there is need for passing of notice to the debtor[11]. Nonetheless, the assignment becomes ineffective because Mary never informs Lucy about the assigning of her debt to Hong. In the case of Dearle v Hall (1828) 3 Russ 1, the court established that raising an action on the appointment of a assignee depends on the notice given to the debtor to complete an assignment process. Lucy, therefore, was not informed, the debt can not be transferred to Hong it's still part of Mary estate.
Conclusion
The old table and the loan belong to Mary's assets. The desk was not properly transferred to Hong because there was no tangible movement of the desk, and Lucy's indebtedness cannot be passed to Hong out rightly without a pass through the rightful legal steps. Therefore, we still have the desk along with the debt, which has remained part of Mary's estate for the trustees to administer following her instructions in the will.
Issue
Comprehensiveness of the possibilities of the use of trust funds in tuition purposes and other tenders in the course of education. Also, there is a question of how the trustees can expend trust monies for Luke's business account deposit.
Rule
The powers of maintenance and advancement come under the UK law by the Trustee Act of 1925, sections 31, and 32. Section 31 provides the relief to the trustees that they are permitted to apply income for the maintenance, education or benefit of the minor beneficiary[12]. Section 32 allows trustees to pay or use the capital to provide for the beneficiary's benefit in such a manner that this allowance may exceed the said share.
Application
Continuing with the maintenance provisions, Jessica's expenses on private school fees fall in place. Legal procedures also allow using the trust income to pay for education; Section 31, Trustee Act 1925. Taking into consideration, parental care, responsibility for her future, and her age and educational requirements, it is quite logical to apply the received trust funds for paying for Jessica private school. This application of funds holds a key with the duty that trustees have to take care of the interest of the beneficiaries.
Luke's requirement of £25000 for business deposit may be categorized as advancement under the Trustee Act 1925 of Great Britain[13]. This section enables the trustees to use the capital for improvement or for the benefit of the beneficiary even if it's using part of the future share. As established in Pilkington v IRC [1964] AC 612, the House of Lords noted that it is legal to make provide for the following: payment of expenses for a beneficiary's education or need necessary for them, funding a beneficiary's business venture, or any other means that would benefit them[14]. Luke's request for a business deposit is also in the realm of the latter as it concerns the development of the career implying positive effects in the long-term perspective.
Conclusion
Under this aspect, Tama and Tessa should be able to grant Jessica and Luke's requests while going by their trustee powers. As for the expenditures of the claimants, Jessica sustained educational expenses, which is considered as maintenance under section 31 while Luke's deposit for his business is considered as advancement under section 32 of the Trustee Act of 1925. The usage of trust funds in both cases is justified for benefit of the beneficiaries and their secure fallback, answering to the trustees' legal requirements and their duties.
It revealed detected fiduciary breaches and dubious investments by the trustees, based on Brown's evaluation. The antique desk and endeavour continue being part of the estate, and the trustees must attend to the beneficiaries' needs in accordance with the principles of Equity and Trusts. Thus, it could be stated that both Luke and Jessica have well-founded concerns regarding the actions of their trustees, which should be addressed under Equity and Trusts law. The trustees' decisions concerning investments and asset management must be reported for consideration of legal compliance and the beneficiaries' interests within the framework of Equity and Trusts. It is imperative to address such issues to maintain both the integrity of Mary's trust and its functional efficiency in line with established doctrines of Equity and Trusts.
Reference List
Journals
Introduction Get free samples written by our Top-Notch subject experts for taking online Assignment...View and Download
Introduction - Amazon's Workplace Change Management: A Strategic Analysis Get free samples written by our Top-Notch subject...View and Download
Introduction Get free samples written by our Top-Notch subject experts for taking help from our assignment...View and Download
Introduction Get Free Online Assignment Samples from UK's Best Assignment Help Experts to boost your academic...View and Download
Introduction Get Free Online Assignment Samples from UK's Best Assignment Helper Experts to boost your academic...View and Download
Introduction Get free samples written by our Top-Notch subject experts for taking online Assignment...View and Download
Copyright 2025 @ Rapid Assignment Help Services
offer valid for limited time only*
