‘GET OUT OF JAIL FREE’ CARD: THE COURTS’ OFFER OF ASSISTANCE TO ERRANT TRUSTEES

Miguel Colebrook
{"title":"‘GET OUT OF JAIL FREE’ CARD: THE COURTS’ OFFER OF ASSISTANCE TO ERRANT TRUSTEES","authors":"Miguel Colebrook","doi":"10.5750/DLJ.V25I1.783","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Decisions taken by trustees have consequences. When trustees make mistakes, especially mistakes that cost the trust fund dearly, can the courts ever erase those errors and let the trustees unwind what they have done and start afresh? To do so, of course, has obvious advantages for both the trustees and those beneficiaries affected by the mistakes, but it is correspondingly disadvantageous for any outsiders who might be equally affected by the court’s decision to erase - in England most typically Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. For a long time, the answer to the question posed seemed to be yes. This invaluable ‘get out of jail free’ card was delivered to errant trustees by virtue of what was routinely known as the ‘ rule in Re Hastings-Bass.’ The Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, has now indicated that this is not right, that Re Hastings-Bass has been misunderstood for over 23 years, and that trustees are not so roundly protected by such a rule. However, in reaching its conclusions, it appears that the Supreme Court may have abolished one rule and replaced it with another, which also seems to benefit trustees.","PeriodicalId":382436,"journal":{"name":"The Denning Law Journal","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Denning Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5750/DLJ.V25I1.783","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Decisions taken by trustees have consequences. When trustees make mistakes, especially mistakes that cost the trust fund dearly, can the courts ever erase those errors and let the trustees unwind what they have done and start afresh? To do so, of course, has obvious advantages for both the trustees and those beneficiaries affected by the mistakes, but it is correspondingly disadvantageous for any outsiders who might be equally affected by the court’s decision to erase - in England most typically Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. For a long time, the answer to the question posed seemed to be yes. This invaluable ‘get out of jail free’ card was delivered to errant trustees by virtue of what was routinely known as the ‘ rule in Re Hastings-Bass.’ The Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, has now indicated that this is not right, that Re Hastings-Bass has been misunderstood for over 23 years, and that trustees are not so roundly protected by such a rule. However, in reaching its conclusions, it appears that the Supreme Court may have abolished one rule and replaced it with another, which also seems to benefit trustees.
“免牢狱之灾”卡:法院向犯错的受托人提供帮助
受托人所做的决定是有后果的。当受托人犯了错误,尤其是让信托基金付出沉重代价的错误时,法院能抹去这些错误,让受托人放下他们所做的一切,重新开始吗?当然,这样做对受托人和那些受错误影响的受益人都有明显的好处,但对任何可能同样受到法院判决影响的局外人来说,这相应地是不利的——在英国,最典型的是女王陛下的税收和海关。很长一段时间以来,这个问题的答案似乎都是肯定的。这张无价的“免牢狱之罪”卡是根据“黑斯廷斯-巴斯案规则”发放给犯错的受托人的。“最高法院,这片土地上的最高法院,现在已经表明这是不对的,雷·黑斯廷斯-巴斯被误解了23年多,受托人没有受到这样的规则的全面保护。”然而,在得出结论时,最高法院似乎废除了一项规则,代之以另一项规则,这似乎也有利于受托人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信