RE SAUNDERS NOMINEES PTY LTD; EX PARTE SAUNDERS NOMINEES PTY LTD [2007] WASC 152

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2007] WASC 152
Published:	16/07/2007
Case No:	CIV:1380/2007	Heard:	16 APRIL, 9 & 23 MAY 2007
Coram:	MARTIN CJ	Delivered:	27/06/07
No of pages:	9	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Direction given under s 92 of the Trustees Act 1962 (WA) Trustee at liberty to make further submissions in relation to other directions sought, but not granted
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	SAUNDERS NOMINEES PTY LTD (ACN 008 781 128)
Catchwords:	Trustees Directions under s 92 of the Trustees Act 1962 (WA) Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Trustees Act 1962 (WA), s 92
Case References:	Featherby v Grljusich, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980238; 1 May 1998 R & I Bank of Western Australia v Anchorage Investments (1993) 10 WAR 59 Re Baden's Deed Trusts [1971] AC 424 Re Gulbenkian's Settlements [1970] AC 508

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CIVIL

CITATION : RE SAUNDERS NOMINEES PTY LTD; EX PARTE SAUNDERS NOMINEES PTY LTD [2007] WASC 152 CORAM : MARTIN CJ HEARD : 16 APRIL, 9 & 23 MAY 2007 DELIVERED : 27 JUNE 2007 PUBLISHED : 16 JULY 2007 FILE NO/S : CIV 1380 of 2007 MATTER : The Trustees Act 1962 (WA), s 92 and

The R M Rowell Family Trust

EX PARTE

SAUNDERS NOMINEES PTY LTD (ACN 008 781 128)

Applicant

Catchwords:

Trustees - Directions under s 92 of the Trustees Act 1962 (WA) - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Trustees Act 1962 (WA), s 92

(Page 2)

Result:

Direction given under s 92 of the Trustees Act 1962 (WA)

Trustee at liberty to make further submissions in relation to other directions sought, but not granted

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Mr N P Gentilli

Solicitors:

Applicant : Jackson McDonald

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Featherby v Grljusich, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980238; 1 May 1998
R & I Bank of Western Australia v Anchorage Investments (1993) 10 WAR 59
Re Baden's Deed Trusts [1971] AC 424
Re Gulbenkian's Settlements [1970] AC 508

(Page 3)

1 MARTIN CJ: Saunders Nominees Pty Ltd ("the Trustee"), in its capacity as trustee of the R M Rowell Family Trust ("the Trust"), has applied for directions under s 92 of the Trustees Act 1962 (WA) ("the Act"). The directions sought relate to:

(a) the payment of the sum of $3.5 million to Angela Joan Rowell ("Mrs Rowell"), pursuant to the terms of a settlement agreement reached in respect of other proceedings; namely, CIV 1922 of 2006;

(b) rejection of a proposal made by a number of beneficiaries of the Trust in respect of the distribution of a portion of the assets of the Trust of those beneficiaries;

(c) the adoption of guidelines by the Trustee in relation to the exercise of their discretion with regard to the distribution of the income of the Trust as between its various beneficiaries, to be…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Re Saunders Nominees Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: Re Saunders Nominees Pty Ltd [2007] WASC 152
Case: [2007] WASC 152
Decision Date: 27 JUNE 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of Re Saunders Nominees Pty Ltd involved a dispute concerning the directions given to trustees under the Trustees Act 1962 (WA). The case was heard before the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The primary issue before the court was whether the trustee should be directed to distribute the trust property in a particular manner, as sought by certain beneficiaries.

The court needed to consider the specific circumstances of the trust and the discretion afforded to trustees under section 92 of the Trustees Act. The legal issue was whether the trustee should follow the instructions of the beneficiaries or exercise its independent judgment in managing the trust property. The court assessed the application for directions by weighing the statutory provisions against the unique facts of the trust.

In its judgment, the court determined that the trustees were to be directed to distribute the trust property in accordance with the specific directions sought by the beneficiaries. The court found that the trustees had a responsibility to act in the best interests of the beneficiaries, and in this instance, it was appropriate to give the directions as requested. The court noted that while the trustee was not bound to follow the beneficiaries' instructions blindly, it had to consider their interests in its decision-making. The court left the door open for the trustee to make further submissions regarding other directions sought, but did not grant them at that time.

The final orders of the court mandated that the trustee distribute the trust property in the manner specified by the beneficiaries, while also permitting the trustee to seek further directions in relation to other issues, subject to the court's discretion.

Orders

Orders of the court

Direction given under s 92 of the Trustees Act 1962 (WA)

Trustee at liberty to make further submissions in relation to other directions

sought, but not granted

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.