Sitting In Private Flashcards
Q: When can the Royal Court sit in private for trust cases?
A: When acting in an administrative capacity (e.g., trustee applications under Article 51) and not deciding adversarial rights, the court may sit in private to protect confidentiality.
Q: What did Re Esteem Settlement establish about sitting in private?
A: Administrative applications (like trustee directions) fall outside the normal rule of open justice; therefore, the court can sit privately.
Q: Can all Article 51 applications be heard in private?
A: No. The Royal Court said in Jersey Evening Post v Al Thani that only some Article 51 cases justify private hearings, mainly administrative or quasi-parental supervision cases.
Q: How does Article 6 of the ECHR (right to a public hearing) apply to trust directions applications?
A: Usually it doesn’t apply because trust directions applications do not determine civil rights – they guide trustees.
Q: What mistake did the Court of Appeal make in Sinel Trust v Rothfield Investments?
A: They wrongly thought that trustee directions applications determined the rights of non-parties, when in fact they only guide the trustee without binding others.
Q: If the Court directs a trustee, does it extinguish the rights of other parties?
A: No. Directions protect trustees from personal liability but do not affect beneficiaries’ or third parties’ property rights.
Q: Why does the Royal Court publish anonymised judgments in trustee applications?
A: To balance public transparency with protection of sensitive trust information and beneficiaries’ privacy.
Q: When might the Court refuse to publish even an anonymised judgment?
A: In especially sensitive cases (like sensitive Beddoe applications) or where facts would reveal identities.
Q: What is a Benjamin Order?
A: An order allowing trustees to distribute assets on a particular assumption (e.g., a missing beneficiary presumed dead) without making final findings on the facts.
Q: Are Benjamin Orders available in Jersey?
A: Yes, under the court’s broad powers in Article 51.
Q: In Northern Trust v Devic, what did the court do using a Benjamin Order?
A: The court allowed distribution to successor states after the collapse of Yugoslavia, assuming no other valid claimants.
Q: What does Article 52 allow the court to do?
A: It allows the court to order execution of documents when a person refuses to comply with an earlier court order.
Q: What does Article 53 allow the court to do?
A: It allows the court to order that costs of a trustee application be paid from the trust fund or by another person.
Q: Under Jersey customary law, when can foreign money judgments be enforced?
A: When the foreign court had jurisdiction and enforcement is not against public policy.
Q: What limits the enforcement of foreign judgments in Jersey concerning trusts?
A: Article 9 of the Trusts Law — it protects Jersey trusts from variation or enforcement by foreign courts where inconsistent with Jersey law.
Q: What is the ‘theory of obligation’ in enforcing foreign judgments?
A: A theory that a foreign judgment imposes a personal obligation (similar to a debt) that can be enforced domestically.
Q: How does Jersey differ from England in explaining enforcement of foreign judgments?
A: Jersey often refers to the doctrine of comity, while England now prefers the theory of obligation.
Q: How can Jersey courts give effect to foreign family court orders concerning trusts?
A: Either by blessing trustee actions under Article 51 or (more rarely) by varying the trust with all necessary consents.
Q: Can the Royal Court vary a trust simply because a foreign divorce court ordered it?
A: No. Jersey courts do not automatically enforce foreign orders; trustees must have powers under the trust deed, or a trust variation must be approved independently.
Q: What does FM v ASL Trust Company say about foreign judgments and Jersey trusts?
A: Jersey trustees must follow Jersey trust law and not foreign court orders unless directed by the Jersey court.
Q: What does Article 9(4) of the Trusts Law prohibit?
A: Enforcement or recognition of a foreign judgment that is inconsistent with Jersey law governing trusts.
