RE FRASER; EX PARTE THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE as MANAGER OF THE ESTATE OF ANNE VERONICA FRASER [2000] WASC 36
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2000] WASC 36 | |
| Case No: | CIV:2155/1999 | 25 JANUARY 2000 | |
| Coram: | McKECHNIE J | 25/01/00 | |
| 8 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Question answered in the negative | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE as MANAGER OF THE ESTATE OF ANNE VERONICA FRASER |
Catchwords: | Public Trustee Powers Whether power to invest Incapable person Whether trust created |
Legislation: | Public Trustee Act 1941 (WA) Mental Health Act 1962 (WA) Mental Health Act 1981 (WA) |
Case References: | In re Brown (1895) 2 Ch 666 In re Knight [1898] 1 Ch 257 Larkman v The Public Trustee [1999] WASCA 93 Melbourne v Department of Social Security (1988) 20 FCR 496 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
- IN CHAMBERS
- Estate of ANNE VERONICA FRASER of Franciscan House, 16 Hampton Street, Victoria Park, Western Australia
EX PARTE
THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE as MANAGER OF THE ESTATE OF ANNE VERONICA FRASER
Applicant
Catchwords:
Public Trustee - Powers - Whether power to invest - Incapable person - Whether trust created
Legislation:
Public Trustee Act 1941 (WA)
Mental Health Act1962 (WA)
Mental Health Act 1981 (WA)
(Page 2)
Result:
Question answered in the negative
Representation:
Counsel:
Applicant : Mr J D Allanson
Solicitors:
Applicant : Public Trustee
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
In re Brown (1895) 2 Ch 666
Case(s) also cited:
In re Knight [1898] 1 Ch 257
Larkman v The Public Trustee [1999] WASCA 93
Melbourne v Department of Social Security (1988) 20 FCR 496
(Page 3)
- McKECHNIE J:
Introduction
1 This is a request by the Public Trustee for the opinion of this Court as to whether in the circumstances the Public Trustee has authority to seek investment advice and where necessary reinvest the assets of an estate in accordance with that advice.
Factual circumstances
2 Ms Fraser was born on 13 September 1947 and is now aged 52. Regrettably, on 29 July 1981 she was declared incapable of managing her affairs. This declaration was made under the provisions of the Mental Health Act 1962 which was, a couple of months later, replaced by the Mental Health Act 1981, but the provisions were in similar form.
3 Her estate is valued at slightly over $1.12 million and consists of shares, real property and money held in the Public Trustee's common fund. The Public Trustee wishes to have the estate professionally reviewed to ensure that the risks pertaining to her assets are evenly balanced.
4 The question which arises is whether, on a proper construction of the Public Trustee Act there is power…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Re Fraser; and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2000] WASC 36
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the Public Trustee possessed the power to invest the trust funds in question and whether a trust had actually been established given Fraser's incapacity. The court needed to interpret the terms of the trust deed and assess the legal implications of Fraser's mental incapacity on the trust's validity and the Public Trustee's investment powers. This involved a careful analysis of statutory provisions concerning the management of an incapable person's affairs and common law principles of trust law.
The court determined that the Public Trustee did not have the power to invest the trust funds without explicit authorisation from the court. The reasoning was based on the interpretation of the trust deed, which did not grant the Public Trustee such powers. Furthermore, the court concluded that the trust was not valid as it was created during Fraser's period of incapacity, and thus, the trust deed was ineffective. This decision was grounded in the legal requirement that a trust must be created by a person of sound mind, and Fraser's incapacity rendered the trust void. Consequently, the court answered the questions posed in the negative, affirming that the Public Trustee lacked the authority to invest and that no valid trust had been established.
Orders
Orders of the court
Question answered in the negative
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.