Next week Julie Van der Velde, Founder and Principal of VdV Legal, will lead our session. Julie has over 20 years’ experience in tax, trusts, and estate planning. She will examine the Privy Council’s decision in Ashley Dawson-Damer v Grampian Trust Co Ltd [2025] UKPC 32, where the trustee shifted 98% of trust assets away from a discretionary beneficiary. The key issue was whether “inadequate deliberation” — failing to obtain up-to-date information about that beneficiary — amounted to a breach requiring the appointments to be set aside.
Case Summary
-
The trustee excluded Ashley from major appointments without consulting her or updating information about her circumstances.
-
The court held this was a breach of fiduciary duty but declined to set aside the appointments because the settlor’s purpose was next-generation benefit and Ashley already had substantial wealth plus a $14m safety net.
Discussion Focus
-
The duty to obtain current beneficiary information.
-
The difference between finding a breach and granting relief.
-
Why trustee decisions may stand despite inadequate deliberation.
This case demonstrates that while trustees must deliberate properly, courts will not unwind appointments unless the outcome might realistically have been different.
Please see below link to case materials which is assumed reading in order to participate in the discussion:
Ashley Dawson-Damer (Appellant) v Grampian Trust Company Ltd and another (Respondents) (Bahamas)
Discussion led by Julie Van der Velde