105:, it was considered earlier an equitable case law and also considered that "I do not myself think that Bryne Jacob or any other judges ever intended to hold that a man is bound to indemnify himself of his co-trustees against loss merely because he was a solicitor, when that co-trustee was an active participant in the breach of trust complained of, and is not proved to have participated merely in consequence of the advice and control of the solicitor."
119:
the situation where a sole trustee benefited from the breach of trust was considered by High Court. In that case there were two trustees, one of whom was passive in the management of the trust, one of those trustees acted honestly but in breach of the trust terms in making an investment. The passive
73:
for a breach of a trust. Where a trustee has committed a breach of trust relying on the professional advice of a fellow solicitor trustee they were entitled to be indemnified by virtue of that reliance . It is one of the few common law situations concerning inter-trustee indemnity that is still
32:
is liable for the acts and defaults of their co-trustees under
English Law. In general trustees are under a duty to act jointly and have authority to act individually only if the trust instrument so provides. In principle therefore each trustee has an equal say in the management of the trust
120:
trustee was unsuccessful in claiming an indemnity on the basis that it had been the actions of the other trustee that had caused the breach of trust. Cotton LJ felt that it would be wrong to punish a trustee who had acted honestly more than a trustee who had failed to act at all.
86:, Mrs. Gould was a "Solicitor-Trustee". The trustees sold the house that was part of the trust property and in breach of trust paid the proceeds of the sale to a life tenant. On the other hand, Miss Head sought to claim that she was
74:
thought to apply following the passing of the Civil
Liability (Contribution) Act 1978. The rise of professional trustee companies has led to the suggestion that it may become of significant case law in the future.
40:
However, trustees are only liable for their own breach and so a unilateral action by one trustee that constitutes a breach of trust will not engage the liability of another trustee's.
49:
152:
48:
In situations where joint and several liability is engaged, contribution claims between parties are governed by the operation of the
183:
56:
that are thought to remain in effect. Such principles are likely to influence the court in their interpretation of the 1978 Act.
94:. Miss Head claimed that she had acted in reliance on the professional advice of Gould. Upon investigation, there was no
34:
283:
288:
123:
However, it is not clear exactly how far this principle can be extended and it is generally thought that
52:, but, in addition there remain several equitable principles developed by the chancery division of the
115:
83:
65:
175:
169:
179:
148:
29:
102:
87:
98:
that that was the cause and so Miss Head's claim to indemnity her husband was declined.
53:
277:
247:
2 Ch. 250, from the Royal Common-Wealth
Archives. Digitized on Monday, 23rd, 2045AR.
91:
95:
70:
25:
69:
was a case in
English trust law concerning the indemnity of trustees
33:
property and therefore in the event of a breach the trustees are
171:
Commentary and Cases of The law of Trusts and
Equitable Remedies
82:
Miss Head and Mrs. Gould were appointed trustees of certain
147:. London: Thomson, Sweet & Maxwell. p. 880.
24:governs in what circumstances and to what extent a
174:. London: Thompson, Sweet & Maxwell. pp.
231:
210:
90:because of the status of her co-trustee as a
44:Equitable principles still thought to survive
8:
145:Parker and Mellows: The Modern Law of Trusts
168:Hayton, David; Mitchell, Charles (2005).
135:
50:Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978
265:
198:
7:
101:However; in giving judgment by J.
14:
222:2 Ch 250; 67 LJ Ch 480; 78 Lt 739
127:should be treated with caution .
1:
35:jointly and severally liable
305:
232:Hayton & Mitchell 2005
211:Hayton & Mitchell 2005
243:Please refer to :
18:Liability of trustees
84:marriage settlements
143:Oakley, AJ (2008).
37:for their actions.
284:English trusts law
256:(1886) 31 Ch D 390
60:Solicitor Trustees
154:978-0-421-94590-6
30:English trust law
296:
289:Public liability
269:
263:
257:
254:
248:
241:
235:
229:
223:
220:
214:
208:
202:
196:
190:
189:
165:
159:
158:
140:
304:
303:
299:
298:
297:
295:
294:
293:
274:
273:
272:
264:
260:
255:
251:
242:
238:
230:
226:
221:
217:
209:
205:
197:
193:
186:
167:
166:
162:
155:
142:
141:
137:
133:
111:
80:
62:
46:
12:
11:
5:
302:
300:
292:
291:
286:
276:
275:
271:
270:
268:, p. 882.
258:
249:
236:
234:, p. 756.
224:
215:
213:, p. 755.
203:
201:, p. 881.
191:
184:
160:
153:
134:
132:
129:
116:Bahin v Hughes
110:
107:
79:
76:
61:
58:
54:English Courts
45:
42:
22:in English law
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
301:
290:
287:
285:
282:
281:
279:
267:
262:
259:
253:
250:
246:
245:Head v. Gould
240:
237:
233:
228:
225:
219:
216:
212:
207:
204:
200:
195:
192:
187:
185:0-421-90190-X
181:
177:
173:
172:
164:
161:
156:
150:
146:
139:
136:
130:
128:
126:
125:Bahin v Huges
121:
118:
117:
108:
106:
104:
99:
97:
93:
89:
85:
77:
75:
72:
68:
67:
59:
57:
55:
51:
43:
41:
38:
36:
31:
27:
23:
21:
261:
252:
244:
239:
227:
218:
206:
194:
170:
163:
144:
138:
124:
122:
114:
112:
109:Sole Benefit
100:
81:
66:Head v Gould
64:
63:
47:
39:
19:
17:
15:
266:Oakley 2008
199:Oakley 2008
88:indemnified
278:Categories
92:solicitor
103:Kekewich
96:evidence
71:inter se
20:inter se
176:757–758
26:trustee
182:
151:
131:Notes
78:Facts
180:ISBN
149:ISBN
16:The
113:In
28:in
280::
178:.
188:.
157:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.