variation of trusts

sui juris beneficiary - full age and sound mind
Principle in Saunders v Vautier - a sui juris beneficiary can collapse the trust.
By the same token, they can vary the terms of a trust.

2 limitation:
1. Re Brockbank: they cannot ask the t'ee to make such and such decision. They can insist upon a variation
2. only sui juris beneficiary can (Variation of Trust Act 1958)

Chapman v Chapman - HL said that the court has no inherent jurisdiction to consent to a variation of the trust on behalf of sui juris beneficiary. The inherent jurisdiction of a trust is only limited to:
1. grand additional administrative power to t'ee in emergency situation
2. sanction maintenance payments to beneficiary

Trustee Act 192, s.57 extended the court's power over emergency situation.
Trustees of the British Museum v AG - the court extend the t'ee's power of investment, based on the factors including:
i) standing of t'ee, their admin plans
ii) size of the fund
iii) object of the fnd


Variation of beneficial interest: Variation of Trusts Act 1958
- the court might approve if the variation would be for their benefit

Goulding v James - the s'or's intention is only relevant if they help the court to determine the what is of benefit to the beneficiaries
Knocker v Youle - but this Act may give rise to substantial inconvenience