This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
The impact of the Hutcheson case on English trust law, and similar trust law in common law jurisdictions, cannot be overemphasised


Guernsey’s statutory legislation, no longer has significance for trustees, despite it being a key distinction between English and Guernsey law. Privy Council Law Lord Clarke stated:


“If, as is common ground, the essential obligation is to act as a prudent trustee would act, namely with reasonable care and skill, it can be said with force that the core obligation of a person acting en bon père de famille includes a duty to act with reasonable care and skill – and thus without negligence.” The circumstances under Guernsey


common law or customary law where a trustee could lawfully exclude its liability from a breach of trust had never previously been determined. While the English Court of Appeal had ruled on this in the 1998 case of Armitage v Nurse, many trust specialists believed that the wrong decision was reached, and so it has not been robustly endorsed. Indeed, two of the Law Lords didn’t


agree with the ruling regarding en bon père de famille. Lady Hale reminded the court that this case was about the law of Guernsey (as opposed to that of England, Wales or Scotland). She also reminded the court that the law of England was by no means clear and


unanimous on this point, and referred to a number of concerns about the decision in Armitage v Nurse. Lord Kerr agreed with Lady Hale, noting


the Guernsey Court of Appeal’s conclusion: “That the law of trusts in Guernsey should not slavishly follow English trust law on the question of whether gross negligence could be exempted by a settlement provision.” The impact of the Hutcheson case on English


trust law, and similar trust law in common law jurisdictions, cannot be overemphasised. It took the Board an unusually long six months to consider and deliver its ruling, which indicates just how important they believed their judgment would be. So where does this leave beneficiaries,


trustees and legal advisers? The decision appears to mean that en bon père de famille no longer has any significance for Guernsey trustees. Equally, those trustees who have been wondering (post Armitage) whether their old exoneration clause would actually provide any protection, can now feel much safer. Also, it should not put off would-be settlors or beneficiaries using Guernsey trusts because as a result of legislation any future


acts of gross negligence by their trustee can be actioned by the beneficiaries. The claim will now be referred back to the Royal Court of Guernsey for trial. n


ADVOCATE JOHN GREENFIELD and KELLY WALTON are Managing Partner and Senior Associate respectively at Carey Olsen in Guernsey


Complex issue


COMMENTING on the Privy Council ruling, Paul Buckle, Group Partner at AO Hall, noted: “It is easy to consider this decision in isolation on its facts, and conclude it will be of limited use going forward because it deals with a situation that can no longer arise. But that would be to miss the case’s real significance, which is that it placed the development of Guernsey trust law in line with the more complex English law, in terms of breach of trust and negligence. That is unlikely to simplify things for local professionals, and that the Privy Council took six months to reach a decision by a three-to-two majority indicates they too found the case hard. What effect all that will have for Guernsey as a trust jurisdiction remains to be seen.”


August/September 2011 businesslife.co 27


IMAGE COURTESY OF VISITGUERNSEY


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80