header-logo header-logo

28 April 2011 / Philippa James , Stuart Pickford
Issue: 7463 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Putting right a wrong turn?

The Court of Appeal revisits the rule in Hastings-Bass. Philippa James & Stuart Pickford report

On 9 March 2011 the Court of Appeal handed down a landmark decision on the scope of the so-called rule in Re Hastings-Bass, deceased [1975] Ch 25 and took the opportunity to put right what Longmore LJ described as an example of “that comparatively rare instance of the law taking a seriously wrong turn”.

The consolidated appeals in Pitt v Holt and Futter v Futter [2011] EWCA Civ 197 are the first occasion on which the Court of Appeal has comprehensively examined the scope and effect of the Hastings-Bass decision since the original judgment in that case was reported in 1975.

The Hasting-Bass rule

The Hastings-Bass rule gained momentum in Mettoy Pension Trustees Ltd v Evans [1990] 1 WLR 1587 and subsequent cases, including Sieff v Fox [2005] EWHC 1312 (Ch) where Lloyd LJ (sitting as a High Court judge) formulated it in the following terms:

“Where trustees act under a discretion given to them

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll