Trust Protectors Research Articles

The role of protectors: a UK perspective

Abstract Absent from English statute, trust protectors are notoriously ill-defined, and that term can take on vastly different meanings between jurisdictions, and between trust instruments. Protector problems are a more frequent feature in offshore trust litigation, in particular regarding the precise nature of protector powers, and whether these should be defined as fiduciary, personal or otherwise. In this article, we explore the UK perspective on the use and incorporation of trust protectors, in comparison to their use in the traditional offshore jurisdictions where they are particularly prevalent, and seemingly only increasing in stature and power, at times exercising genuinely discretionary review functions and sometimes holding powers that exceed those of their trustees. Different interpretations of the key protector power of veto are also explored, with reference to the recent alternate findings on this issue between the Jersey Courts in Piedmont and Riviera Trusts [2021] and the Supreme Court of Bermuda in Re the X Trusts [2021].

The resolutions of the board of trust protectors in the context of the Mexican private express trust

Abstract Significant legal uncertainty exists around the validity of resolutions of the board of trust protectors of private express trusts in Mexican law due to its lacunary regulation. By comparing with Mexican corporate law, specifically with the Mexican sociedad anónima (corporation), the conditions for the validity of the board of trust protectors’ resolutions are resolved. The comparison is made with the regulations that apply to the board of directors’ resolutions and their duty or loyalty and care.

Trust Protectors in the United States. A Step Behind the Rest of the World

Although there are numerous non-US cases and treatises on the trust protector, the US estate planning bar is reluctant to fully consider and reflect their underlying view and treatment of the trust protector in practice. Even the courts in the USA have not taken it upon themselves to opine on the protector’s duties and liabilities, so that all we have, in effect, is a handful of non-committal state statutes to guide US attorneys. Only the Directed Trusteeship Committee of the Uniform Law Commission has risen above this to propose a uniform law to prescribe that the protector’s duties and responsibilities are basically fiduciary.

Trust protectors—an Australian perspective

Trust protectors—an Australian perspective

2015 Texas Estate Planning Legislative Update

This article reviews the highlights of the legislation enacted by the 2015 Texas Legislature relating to the Texas law of intestacy, wills, estate administration, trusts, and other estate planning matters. Some of the key topics include judicial modification and reformation of unambiguous wills, trust protectors, and the Texas versions of the Uniform Real Property Transfer on Death Act and the Uniform Disclaimer of Property Interests Act.

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

Protectors of Trusts

A protector is a guardian is an enforcer ... is a protector, right?

It has become common currency to assimilate protectors in private interest foundations to their trust peers. There is a trend among applicable statutes to expand the scope of powers that the former may be assigned beyond their core supervisory role, bringing them closer to trust protectors. This phenomenon deserves a cautious evaluation, in particular—but not only—in continental, civil law jurisdictions.

An Agency Costs Theory of Trust Law

This Article develops an agency costs theory of the law of private trusts, focusing chiefly on donative trusts. The agency costs approach offers fresh insights into recurring problems in trust law including, among others, modification and termination, settlor standing, fiduciary litigation, trust-investment law and the duty of impartiality, trustee removal, the role of so-called trust protectors, and spendthrift trusts. The normative claim is that the law should minimize the agency costs inherent in locating managerial authority with the trustee and the residual claim with the beneficiaries, but only to the extent that doing so is consistent with the ex ante instructions of the settlor. Accordingly, the use of the private trust triggers a temporal agency problem (whether the trustee will remain loyal to the settlor's original wishes) in addition to the usual agency problem that arises when risk-bearing and management are separated (whether the trustee/manager will act in the best interests of the beneficiaries/residual claimants). The positive claim is that, at least with respect to traditional doctrines, the law conforms to the suggested normative approach. This Article draws on the economics of the principal-agent problem and the theory of the firm, and it engages the ongoing debate about whether trust law is closer to property law or contract law. Although the analysis focuses on donative trusts, it should be amenable to extension in future work to commercial and charitable trusts.

The growing use of trust protectors: are we over-protected?

The growing use of trust protectors: are we over-protected? Alexander A Bove, Jr. Alexander A Bove, Jr. The Law Firm of Bove & Langa, P.C.Ten Tremont Street, Suite 600, Boston MA 02108, United States of America, Tel: +1 617 720 6040, Fax: +1 617 720 1919, E-mail: bove@bovelaw.com, www.bovelaw.com Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Trusts & Trustees, Volume 11, Issue 9, September 2005, Pages 17–19, https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/11.9.17 Published: 01 September 2005