Re Fraser;

Link copied
Case Copied 10 min read

RE FRASER; EX PARTE THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE as MANAGER OF THE ESTATE OF ANNE VERONICA FRASER [2000] WASC 36



SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2000] WASC 36
Case No:CIV:2155/199925 JANUARY 2000
Coram:McKECHNIE J25/01/00
8Judgment 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
CITATION : RE FRASER; EX PARTE THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE as MANAGER OF THE ESTATE OF ANNE VERONICA FRASER [2000] WASC 36 CORAM : McKECHNIE J HEARD : 25 JANUARY 2000 DELIVERED : 25 JANUARY 2000 FILE NO/S : CIV 2155 of 1999 MATTER : Section 58 of the Public Trustee Act 1941
    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…

CaseChat AU logo

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
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2000] WASC 36
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Fraser involved the Public Trustee, who was seeking to determine the extent of his powers in relation to the investments made on behalf of an incapable person, Fraser. Fraser, who was deemed to be of unsound mind, had been the beneficiary of a trust established by his parents. The dispute centred on whether the Public Trustee had the authority to invest the trust funds and whether a valid trust had indeed been created. The matter was brought before the court for clarification.

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.