These proceedings were brought by the primary beneficiary of a Manx trust (the Manx Claimant) which is one of four family trusts (the Trust), all of which are the subject of hostile litigation in Italy in which various beneficiaries of the four trusts (including the Manx Claimant) are inter alia challenging the validity of the trusts under Italian forced heirship laws (the Italian Proceedings).  In a context where the trustee was opposed to the Manx Claimant in the Italian Proceedings, the Manx Claimant sought an appointment of a protector to the Trust, the former protector having resigned in 2017 upon the issuing of the Italian Proceedings.  The trustee declined to appoint a protector and the Manx Claimant issued a claim in the Isle of Man seeking the assistance of the Court with both the construction of the Trust deed and with the reasons given for not appointing a protector by the trustee.  Having been unsuccessful at first instance, the Manx Claimant issued an appeal.


The carefully-considered judgment examines in detail the parties’ arguments surrounding a power which at first blush appeared to be a mere discretionary power (the Trust deed stated the trustee ‘may’ appoint a protector), and whether that power could be considered a blended power.  The Court looked at how the exercise of that power fitted into the wider context of the trustee’s duties and the circumstances of the Trust.  Whilst the Court concluded that the power was, in fact, discretionary, it went on to emphasise the importance of making a reasonable decision within the context of the surrounding circumstances, and by looking at the factors which the trustee should have taken into account in deciding how to exercise its power to appoint a protector, the features which the Manx Claimant identified as reasons the power should be construed as a blended power were relevant to the context in which the trustee had to consider the request.

Review of the trustee’s reasons

Having carried out a detailed review of the trustee’s four stated reasons for deciding not to appoint a protector at that time, the Court reached the conclusion that three of them were irrelevant and the remaining one was, at best, doubtful.  It also found that there were a number of issues the trustee had failed to take into account and / or appreciate, including that there was a direct conflict of interest in the circumstances.


The Court concluded that, in the context of this Trust, the proper way to construe the blended powers argument was to acknowledge that while the power to appoint a new protector was not an imperative power, there should nonetheless be a substantial and proper reason for not appointing a protector if that is the issue in question.  This was particularly so given that all the adult beneficiaries of the Trust considered that a protector should be appointed.  The trustee was ordered to reconsider its decision.

A careful read of this judgment will provide trustees with a useful guide as to the sort of things it should be taking into account when exercising discretionary powers, and provides something of a cautionary tale to trustees who fail to consider relevant factors or consider the potential for their own conflicts of interest.

Appleby represented the Manx Claimant in these proceedings.

Appleby advise on all aspects of trust law, including the establishment, administration, restructuring and termination of private, charitable, and commercial trusts and foundations. We act in a personal capacity as Protector, Enforcer and Director (of Private Trust Companies) for a number of discretionary trusts and are frequently instructed by blue-chip trust institutions.

Key contacts

Charles Davies

Partner: Isle of Man

T +44 (0)1624 647 622
E Email Charles

Erin Trimble-Cregeen

Counsel: Isle of Man, Jersey

T +44 (0)1624 647 914
E Email Erin

Twitter LinkedIn Email Save as PDF
More Publications
19 Mar 2024

Guernsey retains its EU adequacy – as expected

The post-Brexit regulatory landscape continues to throw up challenges and jurisdictional arbitrage, ...

26 Feb 2024

Trusts: Non-intervention in the Isle of Man

The recent Isle of Man judgment of the Staff of Government Division (SGD) in the case of A and B v C...

4 Dec 2023

Isle of Man Trusts and Trustees Act 2023 Update

The much anticipated Trusts and Trustees Act 2023 received Royal Assent on the 18 July 2023, bringin...

18 Jul 2023

The 2023 Guide to Fintech for the Isle of Man

Appleby has provided the Isle of Man chapter to the ICLG Fintech 2023. The “International Comparat...

20 Mar 2023

Trusts: Comparison between the Crown Dependencies

Our Private Client and Trusts specialists in Guernsey, Isle of Man and Jersey outline some of the ke...

19 Jan 2023

The Edinburgh Reforms: An Offshore Perspective

On 9 December 2022, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a package of reforms to the UK fina...

15 Nov 2022

Insurance and reinsurance in the Isle of Man: Overview

A Q&A guide to insurance and reinsurance in the Isle of Man. Reproduced from Practical Law with the ...

3 Nov 2022

Significant Judgment for Isle of Man Fund Managers

A rethink of exclusion clauses in fund agreements may be needed after the Isle of Man’s appeal cou...

25 Oct 2022

An update to Isle of Man Trust Law

In the week that the Trust and Trustees Bill 2022 goes for its second reading (25 October 2022), it ...

27 Sep 2022

Similar but Different

While the basic features of the trust remain, there are some notable differences in how trusts can b...