Sometimes it can be convenient to lose sight of the obligations of a trustee due to the manner in which the trustee relationship is referred to or recorded. See Kirkpatrick v Burns[1] where the Court, having reviewed the obligations of bare trustees, said at [62] “Although consideration of whether the trustees are “bare trustees” may … Continue reading →
The case of Unkovich v Clapham provides an excellent example of the difficult decisions trustees must make when seeking to uphold decisions made by them in the face of opposition. It is useful to first consider the principles that apply to trustee decision making, which are set out at [47] and [48] as follows: [47] … Continue reading →