First Island Trustees Ltd v M

• Jurisdiction: Jersey
• Court: Royal Court
• Judge: The Deputy Bailiff
• Judgment Date: 25 July 2006
• Neutral Citation: [2006] JRC 105A
• Date: 25 July 2006

[2006] JRC 105A

ROYAL COURT

(Family Division)

Before:

M. C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Georgelin and King.

In the Matter of the Representation of First Island Trustees Limited

And in the Matter of the Avalon Trust

And in the Matter of Articles 51 And 53 of the Trusts (Jersey) Law 1984, as Amended

Advocate M. H. Temple for First Island Trustees Limited.

Advocate J. M. P. Gleeson for the minor and unborn beneficiaries.

Advocate L. K. A. Richardson on behalf of the wife

Authorities

Rabaiotti [2000] JLR 173.

The Deputy Bailiff

1 This is a Representation by First Island Trustees Limited as trustee of the Avalon Trust, which is a discretionary trust governed by the law of Jersey, established on 3 ^rd April, 1995, by OK as settlor. The class of beneficiaries comprise the settlor herself; her son D; D's wife MI; D's three children M, T and B andany other issue of D and MI. The only other currently living issue are the four children of B, three of whom are over 18 and one of whom is 15.

2 Advocate Gleeson has been appointed to represent the minor and unascertained beneficiaries of the Trust.

3 I propose to refer to the beneficiaries by their first names for convenience, but intend no disrespect by this. MI has died, but the remaining beneficiaries are all still living.

4 So far the trust assets have essentially been conserved in the Trust. They were initially provided by the settlor and the only distributions, apparently, have been £30,000 to D and his wife in 1996, and £50,000 to T in March 2000.

5 M is now involved in divorce proceedings in England, as part of those proceedings the Family Division of the High Court has made an order requiring M to produce documents in relation to the Trust. M, apparently, does not have any such documents and accordingly has requested the Trustee to provide him with such documents so that he may, in turn, comply with the order of the Family Division.

6 The Trustee is minded to comply with M's request in part and seeks the Court's approval to the course of action which it proposes to take. The documents requested can be considered under three categories.

7 In the first place there are documents such as the accounts of the Trust, the Trust Deed and any supplemental Deeds of Appointment and details of distributions which have been made. These are clearly documents which, in accordance with the decision in Rabaiotti [2000] JLR 173, a beneficiary is normally to be provided with unless there is good reason not to do so.

8 In our judgment far from there being good reason not to provide M with such documents, there is good reason to do so. Even accepting that M has only asked for these documents so that he may provide them to his wife (who is not a beneficiary of the Trust) and the English Court, it seems to us to be in his interests and the interests of justice generally that the English Court should be made aware of the financial position of the Trust and the extent, if any, to which M has benefited from it in the past.

9 The second category of document...