Thomas Arnull, ‘Sham trusts and the requirement that a shamming intent be shared: Administrators of the Estate of Hanson v O’Leary and Others

ABSTRACT
In the recent case of Hanson, the Royal Court considered at length the principles applicable to claims that a trust is a sham and as such is void. The Court traced the case law through a number of recent developments. It reaffirmed the principle that, whereas a trustee’s recklessness as to the terms of an apparent trust will constitute an intention that the assets would not be held on those apparent terms, recklessness will not suffice for the required intention to mislead third parties.

Thomas Arnull, Sham trusts and the requirement that a shamming intent be shared: Administrators of the Estate of Hanson v O’Leary and Others, Trusts and Trustees, https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/ttac034. Published 9 June.

(Visited 31 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply