POWER OF TRUSTEE

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11650, 15 October 1923, Page 6

POWER OF TRUSTEE

GAN HE SELL TO WIFE ? "NO ENGLISH AUTHORITY TO CONTRARY.'’ BENEFICIARIES' CLAIM. Mr Ju stico Salniond fin- dismissed ft claim by two beneficiaries und+'r tbe will oi‘ Daniel RiLcrtson. who died m November. 1: * ID. a matter that crime before His Honour Inrt month, when Mr (». G. Watson appeared for tho plaintiffs, and Mr G. W'iiito for the utiViulants who wore trustees in the estate of the deceased. The plaintiffs were William Ding R.rbortson and another The defendants .lames Alexander Robertson and Hubert Maclntyre Virtue, were the surviving executory and trustees. On July 7th, 1919,. the trustees, in the exercise of the trust for sale con tained in the will, sold and transferred to the defendant Jessie Robejt son, wife of the trustee James Alex andcr Robertson, a freehold property forming part of the trust estate. On the same day the trustees sold and transferred another freehold property forming part of the same estate to the defendant Jessie Virtue, wile of the defendant trustee Robert Maclntyre Virtue. On September Bth. 1919, the trustees sold and transferred a third freehold property forming part of the trust estate to one John \\ illiam Robertson.

The question at issue was whether a trustee could sell to his wife. His Honour said it was true that there was no direct English authority establishing the rule that a trustee could not sell to his wife. “This circumstance, *’ said His Honour, *‘it not conclusive, for the rule that a trustee cannot sell to himself is not an isolated rule standing by itself, hut is merely an illustration and application of the wider principle that a trustee must not place himself in any position in which his interest*! conflict with his duty. The question is whether he docs not violate this rule when he sells the trust property to his wife, no Jess than when he sella it to himself.”

The action was dismissed. Inasmuch, however, as the plea of confirmation on which the defendants had succeeded was not raised before trial, but represented an amendment made during the trial by leave of the court and on special terms as to costs. His Honour did not order the plaintiffs tc pay the full costs of the action. Mr M. Alters, K.C. with Mr W. E. Leicester lepresented the defendants, Jessie Robertson and Jessie Virtue.