Re Representation of C re P Trust [2024] JRC 299

This case involved a dispute over the administration of the P Trust, a Jersey proper law discretionary trust. The Representor, a beneficiary and settlor of the trust, sought the removal of Fenlight Trustees Limited as trustee, alleging a breakdown in relationships and breaches of trust. The P Trust owns 50% of a Jersey holding company, which in turn owns a successful trading company. The other half is owned by the N Trust, administered by a different trustee.

The Representor’s two sons, F and D, were involved in the underlying company, with D remaining closely involved while F reduced his involvement. The Representor claimed that Fenlight’s administration favoured D and marginalised her, leading to a complete breakdown in their relationship. Specific allegations included unauthorised appointments of beneficiaries, withholding information, and improper financial management.

The court reviewed the background and previous judgments, including the August 2021 judgment by Commissioner Clyde-Smith, which established a confidentiality club. The court refused to vary the terms of this confidentiality club and denied the request to hold the proceedings in public, emphasising the need to protect the interests of the beneficiaries and the trust’s confidential affairs.

The judgment allowed F to file evidence in reply, addressing specific criticisms and allegations made against him. The court also permitted IQEQ, the trustee of the N Trust, to file evidence in reply to certain paragraphs of the affidavits. However, the court refused to allow evidence from E, another involved party, due to conflicts of interest.

Overall, the court maintained the confidentiality of the proceedings, focusing on the welfare of the beneficiaries and the good administration of the trust. The case highlighted the complexities of trust administration, the importance of maintaining confidentiality, and the challenges of resolving disputes within family trusts.