header-logo header-logo

Trusts

20 June 2014
Issue: 7611 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Shergill and others v Khaira and others [2014] UKSC 33, [2014] All ER (D) 83 (Jun)

It was established law that, first, trustees who had been appointed under the terms of a trust deed could not challenge the validity of the deed. That would presumably be justified on the ground that the only basis upon which they had any title to involve themselves in the affairs of the trust was as trustees, and they could not therefore impugn the very document under which they had achieved that status. They would be almost tantamount to denying their own title. Second, where a charitable trust was initially created by donors in general or vague terms, it was open to the trustee to execute a more specific deed which limited the terms of the trust, provided it did not conflict with the terms on which the donors had made their donations—and that a challenge to any terms of the specific deed had to be made by the Attorney-General (or possibly by the donors). Where those principles applied, it seemed that trustees

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll