| 释义 |
rule in Re Hastings Bass
The principle that in some circumstances the court can set aside a disposition by trustees if it is clear that the trustees would (or perhaps might) not have acted as they did had they: (i) taken into account considerations that they ought to have taken into account; or (ii) declined to take into account considerations that they ought not to have taken into account. The principle emanated from the case of Re Hastings Bass [1975] Ch 25 and was initially concerned only with the need to protect beneficiaries against aberrant trustees. However, the way in which the rule was applied in some subsequent cases attracted much criticism. In Pitt v Holt and Futter v Futter [2013] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court greatly narrowed the scope and effect of the principle. It is now clear that if trustees, having discharged their duty by taking appropriate professional advice (on, for example, the tax consequences of a transaction), make the wrong decision on wrong advice then their decision stands and the transaction will not be voided. This potentially exposes trustees to liability even though they have acted in accordance with skilled professional advice. |