Skip Navigation


Trusts & Trustees Advance Access originally published online on June 16, 2008
Trusts & Trustees 2008 14(6):416-423; doi:10.1093/tandt/ttn049
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
14/6/416    most recent
ttn049v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Steen, P.
Right arrow Articles by Speck, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Litigation costs of a neutral trustee: developments in Jersey

Alhamrani & Ors v Alhamrani & Ors [2007] JCA 164

Peter Steen, Bruce Lincoln and Jonathan Speck, Mourant du Feu & Jeune*

*Mourant du Feu & Jeune, 22 Grenville Street, St Helier, JE4 8PX, Jersey.

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.


   Introduction
 
On 30 August 2007, the Jersey Court of Appeal (‘CA’)1 gave a judgment in respect of the entitlement of a neutral trustee to its costs of litigation between other warring parties. Specifically, the CA considered whether such costs should be subject automatically to taxation and, if so, what form that taxation should take.

The CA's judgment concerned an appeal against a judgment of the Royal Court of Jersey of 18 January 2007. However, the CA, in reaching its decision, also considered a series of recent decisions of the Royal Court in which the question of a neutral trustee's entitlement to its costs had been considered. Before looking in detail at the CA's judgment, it is helpful, therefore, to first briefly examine these preceding Royal Court judgments.

Three of the Royal Court's decisions considered by the CA arose in the context of the same ongoing and high value trust litigation with . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Alhamrani: the Bailiff's decision of 25 May 2006
Alhamrani: Commissioner Page's decision of 18 January 2007
Alhamrani: the Bailiff's supplemental judgment of 1 March 2007
Landau v Anburn Trustees Limited

   The CA judgment in Alhamrani
 
Background and issues
Consideration of previous judgments
Statutory authority and the trust deed
English case law
Arguments put before the CA and the CA's findings
No automatic right to taxation
Discounting rates not to be used
Threshold for invoking the court's jurisdiction
The procedure
Disallowing a trustee's costs
Costs of overseas lawyers

   Conclusion
 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?