header-logo header-logo

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

Trusts

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 had to have the power to include new provisions in

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll