Case summary: Michaela Walker & Ors v Paul Egerton-Vernon & Ors  JRC 025
The Royal Court in Jersey has ruled that a private trust company (PTC) seeking to bring claims for breach of trust against its predecessors could not benefit from the Jersey law doctrine of empêchement d’agir. This was because the PTC had not been incorporated at the time that the three-year deadline for bringing claims under article 57(3B) of the Trusts (Jersey) Law 1984 expired. The doctrine of empêchement stops time running on limitation periods in situations of practical impossibility.
The first to third plaintiffs were beneficiaries of a Jersey law discretionary trust bringing negligence claims of around £130m against the first to third defendants, the former trustees, as well as breach of contract claims against the fourth defendant, the former trust administration services provider…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co briefing.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
Sanctions for regulatory offences, particularly for larger corporates, set to increase substantially.
Welcome clarity from the European Patent Office as to the scope of claim ‘examination’ in the course of post-grant amendment proceedings.