I have recently had occasion in a deceased's estate to consider a will made by the deceased's late wife (who predeceased her husband), which included a mini-discretionary trust where a bank was appointed as a trustee by the testator, the object of the trust being to benefit a child, and grandchildren, on her husband's death.

The will contained the usual perpetuities clause of 80 years. However, on the death of the husband, the bank (which was aware of the object of the trust) nonetheless applied trust principles, to the effect that it had to be satisfied that the intended beneficiaries needed the funds.


The bank refused to close down the trust as (it would seem) it regarded the perpetuity period as being an 80-year trust for earning fees.


While technically the bank is correct in its approach, this is nonetheless not the object or intention in the creation of such trusts, which usually are intended to benefit the surviving spouse (in most cases) and the parties' children, but ultimately with the choice on the death of the surviving parent to extend by consultation the trust beyond their children if they wish.


It might, therefore, be prudent to point out that appointing banks that take a commercial view of such trusts may not be a good idea.


James Hueston, Lane & Co, Cheltenham