Is it time for a Public Trustee’s office in Jersey? Representation of Sabba Trust
In this case there had been a succession of fundamental errors in the administration of two Jersey trusts, both given the same name and having the same terms and beneficiaries. The assets of the first trust were transferred to the second trust but there was no record showing that this had been done or the basis upon which the assets were to be held. The trustee of the first trust was later struck off. The trustee of the second trust purported to appoint a replacement protector, but under the terms of the trust, and in the circumstances, that power belonged to the protector for the time being. Another company (albeit apparently having the same directors) then purported to declare itself trustee of the second trust in replacement of the existing trustee, again without any basis in the terms of the trust. The original trustee of the second trust was then wound up and dissolved in a summary winding-up. The purported new trustee in due course retired and appointed a Mauritius company as successor and the successor purported to change the proper law of the trust to that of Mauritius, though it was not a validly appointed trustee at all and a change in proper law required in any event, under the terms of trust, the consent of the protector. The Mauritius company had in turn subsequently retired in favour of a trustee in Dubai. A beneficiary under both trusts sought declarations as to the validity of these various deeds…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Ogier briefing.
News from Ogier
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Ogier
The Security Interests (Jersey) Law 2012 came into force on 2 January 2014, introducing a new regime for creating security over intangible movables under Jersey law.
Lenders, borrowers and other counterparties are looking more closely at the impact of possible insolvency proceedings.