Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 22 views

    Equity and Trust Answer

    Uploaded by

    Wandana Fernando
    The court in Macwell v. Dalton sought to determine if the objects of a discretionary trust were certain enough to be valid. The court ruled that for a trust to be valid, it must outline the identity of beneficiaries and their rights. A discretionary trust aims to identify a class of potential beneficiaries rather than single beneficiaries. The court determined the trust in question adequately identified the class of potential beneficiaries and granted the trustee discretion to allocate assets, making it a valid discretionary trust. This ruling established guidelines for determining the validity of discretionary trusts that were applied in subsequent cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Equity and Trust Answer

    Uploaded by

    Wandana Fernando
    22 views2 pages
    The court in Macwell v. Dalton sought to determine if the objects of a discretionary trust were certain enough to be valid. The court ruled that for a trust to be valid, it must outline the identity of beneficiaries and their rights. A discretionary trust aims to identify a class of potential beneficiaries rather than single beneficiaries. The court determined the trust in question adequately identified the class of potential beneficiaries and granted the trustee discretion to allocate assets, making it a valid discretionary trust. This ruling established guidelines for determining the validity of discretionary trusts that were applied in subsequent cases.

    Original Title

    equity and trust answer

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The court in Macwell v. Dalton sought to determine if the objects of a discretionary trust were certain enough to be valid. The court ruled that for a trust to be valid, it must outline the identity of beneficiaries and their rights. A discretionary trust aims to identify a class of potential beneficiaries rather than single beneficiaries. The court determined the trust in question adequately identified the class of potential beneficiaries and granted the trustee discretion to allocate assets, making it a valid discretionary trust. This ruling established guidelines for determining the validity of discretionary trusts that were applied in subsequent cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    22 views2 pages

    Equity and Trust Answer

    Uploaded by

    Wandana Fernando
    The court in Macwell v. Dalton sought to determine if the objects of a discretionary trust were certain enough to be valid. The court ruled that for a trust to be valid, it must outline the identity of beneficiaries and their rights. A discretionary trust aims to identify a class of potential beneficiaries rather than single beneficiaries. The court determined the trust in question adequately identified the class of potential beneficiaries and granted the trustee discretion to allocate assets, making it a valid discretionary trust. This ruling established guidelines for determining the validity of discretionary trusts that were applied in subsequent cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    MACWELL V DAlTON Case…

    The court's objective in Macwell v. Dalton was to determine the certainty of the objects covered by a
    discretionary trust. A trust type known as a discretionary trust gives the trustee the freedom to choose
    how to divide the assets of the trust among the beneficiaries.

    In this instance, the trust stated that the trustee had the authority to give any of the designated
    beneficiaries a distribution of trust property "as the Trustee considers fit." The court ruled that a trust's
    objects must be certain in order for it to be legal.

    This means that the trust must outline the identity of the beneficiaries as well as their rights. In a
    discretionary trust, the class of prospective beneficiaries, rather than a single beneficiary, is the trust's
    aim.

    The court determined that the trust's language in this instance was adequate to identify the class of
    potential beneficiaries and grant the trustee the freedom to allocate the trust's assets among them as
    he saw fit.

    As a result, the court determined that the trust's goals were clear and that it was legitimate. According
    to the ruling in Macwell v. Dalton, a discretionary trust must designate the class of prospective
    beneficiaries and grant the trustee the authority to decide how to distribute the trust's assets among
    them in order to be legal. This aids in ensuring the trust's objects are certain, which is necessary for any
    trust to be valid.

    The guidelines established in Macwell v. Dalton have been utilised in other cases, including Re Gartside,
    Re Endacott, and Re Staveley.

    In Re Gartside, the court examined the legality of a trust that allowed the trustee to choose which of the
    designated beneficiaries would receive trust assets "as the Trustee considers fit." Using Macwell v.
    Dalton as a guide, the court determined that the trust's language was sufficient to identify the class of
    possible beneficiaries and grant the trustee the freedom to distribute the trust's assets among them as
    he saw fit.

    In Re Endacott, the court was asked to decide whether a discretionary trust that distributed trust assets
    to "such of the settlor's offspring as the trustees in their absolute discretion judge fit" was legitimate.
    The court determined that the phrase was adequate to create the class of possible beneficiaries by
    applying the guidelines set forth in Macwell v. Dalton. As a result, the court determined that the trust
    was legitimate and that its goals were clear.

    In Re Staveley, the court determined that the language of a discretionary trust that allowed the trustees
    to divide trust assets among "such of the children of the settlor as the trustees in their absolute
    discretion think fit" was valid because it created a distinct class of potential beneficiaries. This decision
    came after Macwell v. Dalton.
    The Macwell v. Dalton ruling is noteworthy overall because it offers advice on how to assess the
    certainty of objects under a discretionary trust. It specifies the conditions necessary for a discretionary
    trust to be legal and aids in ensuring that trusts are properly managed and that the rights of the
    beneficiaries are safeguarded.

    You might also like