在离婚的情况下,自由信托的风险分析:家事法院的资产分割方法在多大程度上破坏了自由信托?

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW Trusts & Trustees Pub Date : 2023-10-26 DOI:10.1093/tandt/ttad078
Nicole Chan
{"title":"在离婚的情况下,自由信托的风险分析:家事法院的资产分割方法在多大程度上破坏了自由信托?","authors":"Nicole Chan","doi":"10.1093/tandt/ttad078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Following the House of Lords’ decision in White v White, the concept of ‘equality’ has made asset computation and division following divorce, particularly in ‘big-money’ cases, more extensive. This article examines whether discretionary trusts are vulnerable to interference by the Family Court during ancillary relief proceedings through considering three approaches. First, by varying the trust settlement under section 24(1)(c) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (‘MCA’). Second, through the ‘resource’ approach under section 25(2)(a) MCA. Third, by relying on the sham doctrine. It accordingly identifies practical considerations for trustees and settlors to ensure that their trust assets remain intact following divorce proceedings.","PeriodicalId":43396,"journal":{"name":"Trusts & Trustees","volume":"12 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An analysis of the risks that arise for discretionary trust settlements in the event of a divorce: to what extent does the Family Court’s asset division approach undermine discretionary trusts?\",\"authors\":\"Nicole Chan\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/tandt/ttad078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Following the House of Lords’ decision in White v White, the concept of ‘equality’ has made asset computation and division following divorce, particularly in ‘big-money’ cases, more extensive. This article examines whether discretionary trusts are vulnerable to interference by the Family Court during ancillary relief proceedings through considering three approaches. First, by varying the trust settlement under section 24(1)(c) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (‘MCA’). Second, through the ‘resource’ approach under section 25(2)(a) MCA. Third, by relying on the sham doctrine. It accordingly identifies practical considerations for trustees and settlors to ensure that their trust assets remain intact following divorce proceedings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trusts & Trustees\",\"volume\":\"12 6\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trusts & Trustees\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/ttad078\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trusts & Trustees","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/ttad078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着英国上议院对怀特诉怀特案的判决,“平等”的概念使得离婚后的财产计算和分割,特别是在“巨额财产”案件中得到了更广泛的应用。本文通过考虑三种方法来考察自由裁量信托在辅助救济程序中是否容易受到家事法院的干扰。首先,根据《1973年婚姻原因法》(MCA)第24(1)(c)条,改变信托协议。第二,通过《MCA》第25(2)(a)条规定的“资源”方法。第三,依靠伪教义。因此,它确定了受托人和调解人在离婚诉讼后确保其信托资产完好无损的实际考虑因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An analysis of the risks that arise for discretionary trust settlements in the event of a divorce: to what extent does the Family Court’s asset division approach undermine discretionary trusts?
Abstract Following the House of Lords’ decision in White v White, the concept of ‘equality’ has made asset computation and division following divorce, particularly in ‘big-money’ cases, more extensive. This article examines whether discretionary trusts are vulnerable to interference by the Family Court during ancillary relief proceedings through considering three approaches. First, by varying the trust settlement under section 24(1)(c) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (‘MCA’). Second, through the ‘resource’ approach under section 25(2)(a) MCA. Third, by relying on the sham doctrine. It accordingly identifies practical considerations for trustees and settlors to ensure that their trust assets remain intact following divorce proceedings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
66.70%
发文量
92
期刊最新文献
CC14 guidance update: greener investments, greater uncertainty? Australian tax arrangements for trusts: Section 100A of the Income Tax Assessment Act (1936) Cth Fathers, daughters, and matters of trust In brief An analysis of the risks that arise for discretionary trust settlements in the event of a divorce: to what extent does the Family Court’s asset division approach undermine discretionary trusts?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1