![Headshot of Edward Mackereth](/media/otredl34/ed-mackereth.jpg?cc=0.27133942281930434,0.07581310967312077,0.16674735016381007,0.36171118760727405&width=1440&height=960&quality=90)
Edward Mackereth
Global Managing Partner | Legal
Jersey
![Headshot of Edward Mackereth](/media/otredl34/ed-mackereth.jpg?cc=0.31653818097562053,0.07395197125275846,0.2921016925850026,0.33839550515859684&width=300&height=300&quality=90)
Edward Mackereth
Global Managing Partner
Jersey
Big things are happening at Ogier. Change is embedded in everything we do. It is redefining our talent, our ways of working, our platforms of delivery, our culture.
Services
We have the expertise to handle the most demanding transactions. Our commercial understanding and experience of working with leading financial institutions, professional advisers and regulatory bodies means we add real value to clients’ businesses.
Sectors
Our sector approach relies on smart collaboration between teams who have a deep understanding of related businesses and industry dynamics. The specific combination of our highly informed experts helps our clients to see around corners.
We have the expertise to handle the most demanding transactions. Our commercial understanding and experience of working with leading financial institutions, professional advisers and regulatory bodies means we add real value to clients’ businesses.
Legal
Corporate and Fiduciary
Consulting
Banking and Finance
Corporate
Dispute Resolution
Employment law
Intellectual Property
Investment Funds
Listing services
Local Legal Services
Accounting and Financial Reporting Services - Ogier Global
Cayman Islands AML/CFT training - Ogier Global
Corporate Services - Ogier Global
Regulatory and Compliance Services - Ogier Global
Sustainable Investment Consulting
Our sector approach relies on smart collaboration between teams who have a deep understanding of related businesses and industry dynamics. The specific combination of our highly informed experts helps our clients to see around corners.
Ogier provides practical advice on BVI, Cayman Islands, Guernsey, Irish, Jersey and Luxembourg law through our global network of offices across the Asian, Caribbean and European timezones. Ogier is the only firm to advise on this unique combination of laws.
Keep up to date with industry insights, analysis and reviews. Find out about the work of our expert teams and subscribe to receive our newsletters straight to your inbox.
Fresh thinking, sharper opinion.
We get straight to the point, managing complexity to get to the essentials. Our global network of offices covers every time zone.
About us
Corporate social responsibility (CSR)
Diversity, equity and inclusion
Information security
Innovation
Sustainability
No Content Set
Exception:
Website.Models.ViewModels.Components.General.Banners.BannerComponentVm
Insight
29 April 2014
Jersey
3 min read
ON THIS PAGE
This decision is the most recent Jersey decision to consider setting aside a trust on the ground of mistake, and the first Jersey case decided after the introduction of the recent amendments to the Trusts (Jersey) Law 1984 (the Amendment) which included provisions concerning mistake.
The Settlor sold his share in the family business and settled the proceeds into a Jersey trust as part of a move to the Isle of Man.
Despite having taken tax advice, the Settlor was not told that under English deemed domicile rules he would continue to be treated as UK resident and domiciled for up to three years, (regardless of the fact that he had elected the Isle of Man as a domicile of choice), triggering tax liabilities accounting for 25% of the trust fund.
The Settlor therefore sought an order from the Royal Court that the trust be set aside on grounds of mistake, under Article 11 of the Trusts (Jersey) Law (as amended) 1984 (the Law), alternatively under Article 47E of the Law. He argued that had he known of the tax consequences at the time, he would not have established the trust then (or possibly at all).
The Deputy Bailiff considered the interplay between Articles 11 and 47E. He noted that relief under Articles 47B to 47H of the Amendment required the pre-existence of a trust in order for the Court's discretion to declare a transaction voidable to be successfully invoked, whereas relief under Article 11 could be applied for where the creation, validity and duration of a trust was at stake. On that basis he concluded that the provisions were distinct from one another, that Article 11 still stood and was not now subsumed within Article 47E and that he would approach these proceedings under Article 11 of the Law.
To decide whether the relief should be granted, the Deputy Bailiff applied the three part test set down by the Royal Court in Re Lochmore Trust [2010] JRC 068 and the three following questions were considered:
The Deputy Bailiff was satisfied that the Settlor had wrongly appreciated the tax implications of setting up the trust and that he would not have entered into this transaction but for his incomplete understanding of the situation. The Royal Court was also satisfied that it would be unjust to leave this state of affairs uncorrected and therefore intervened to declare the creation of the trust invalid.
The Deputy Bailiff alluded briefly to the point raised by Lord Walker in the English Supreme Court's decision in Pitt v. Holt [2013] UKSC 24 that in applications involving a request for the rectification on the consequences of artificial tax avoidance, relief could be refused on grounds of public policy or on the basis that the taxpayer could be deemed to have accepted the risks associated with such arrangements. He found that it was unnecessary to consider the point further in this case, however, trustees and taxpayers relying on expert tax advice should keep this in mind.
The trustee sought an order from the Royal Court for the trust fund to cover the trustee's administrative costs from October 1997 to date and reasonable legal fees in this action, to the extent it could not recover these through the indemnity it had been provided with from the tax advisers of the Settlor. The trustee drew the Royal Court's attention to the decision in Des Pallieres v JP Morgan Chase & Co [2013] JCA 146 where it was recognised that in circumstances where a fiduciary actioned to administrative proceedings is acting reasonably and in the absence of any misconduct, it would be entitled to an indemnity from the trust fund in relation to all costs and reasonable expenses.
The Court distinguished the present case from both the Re Buckton [1907] 2 Ch 406 and the Des Pallieres v JP Morgan Chase & Co [2013] JCA 146 decisions and found the trustee could not rely on article 53 of the Law or the trust deed in circumstances where the trust had been set aside. However it would still be possible for the trustee to seek such an order pursuant to article 26 of the Law and the inherent jurisdiction of the Court because where no wrongdoing on the part of the trustee could be established, there would be "no equity in leaving the trustee out of pocket".
Ultimately the Royal Court found that the trustee was entitled to pay itself, or retain to the extent already paid, its costs of the present application out of the trust assets if not otherwise paid, unless the Royal Court found these to have been incurred unreasonably. That way, if the tax advisor (who had indemnified the trustee's reasonable costs of the application) disputed the reasonableness of the costs, the matter could be brought back before the court for a determination.
This decision provides useful clarification that Article 11 is to run in parallel to the Amendment provisions contained in Article 47 of the Law. It also confirms that the definition of mistake and the test for establishing mistake under the well known Jersey cases continues to be good law.
Edward Mackereth
Global Managing Partner | Legal
Jersey
Edward Mackereth
Global Managing Partner
Jersey
Contact Edward
Back
Nick Williams
Partner | Legal
Jersey
Nick Williams
Partner
Jersey
Contact Nick
Back
James Campbell
Partner | Legal
Jersey
James Campbell
Partner
Jersey
Contact James
Back
Josephine Howe
Partner | Legal
Jersey
Josephine Howe
Partner
Jersey
Contact Josephine
Back
Ogier is a professional services firm with the knowledge and expertise to handle the most demanding and complex transactions and provide expert, efficient and cost-effective services to all our clients. We regularly win awards for the quality of our client service, our work and our people.
This client briefing has been prepared for clients and professional associates of Ogier. The information and expressions of opinion which it contains are not intended to be a comprehensive study or to provide legal advice and should not be treated as a substitute for specific advice concerning individual situations.
Regulatory information can be found under Legal Notice
Sign up to receive updates and newsletters from us.
Sign up
No Content Set
Exception:
Website.Models.ViewModels.Blocks.SiteBlocks.CookiePolicySiteBlockVm