<i>In the Matter of the O Trust</i> [2025] CIGC FSD 1 and 56

Abstract In the Matter of the O Trust [2025] CIGC FSD 1 and 56 concerned the courses of action open to a trustee who holds an express power to resign but the sole lifetime beneficiary of the trust will not constructively engage in the appointment of a successor—or in resolving their own complaints about trust administration. The trustee applied to the Cayman Islands Grand Court (per Kawaley J.) for directions, which necessarily involved considering (1) the proper course for the trustee concerning ongoing trust administration given the predicament it faced and (2), in that context, whether the Court could pass the trustee’s accounts and determine the basis for approving its ongoing fees, costs and expenses. This analysis examines the Court’s reasoning and in particular the practical implications of the bespoke “held before the Court” regime approved in this case under principles the Judge aptly described as “not ‘run of the mill’ under Cayman trusts law.”

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Trusts & Trustees
Published
2025-12-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/ttaf103
Primary Topic
Legal principles and applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

In the Matter of the O Trust [2025] CIGC FSD 1 and 56

Andrew De La Rosa, Charles Moore, Harriet Green
Trusts & Trustees
Legal principles and applications
article

In the Matter of the O Trust [2025] CIGC FSD 1 and 56

Andrew De La Rosa, Charles Moore, Harriet Green
article en

Abstract

Abstract In the Matter of the O Trust [2025] CIGC FSD 1 and 56 concerned the courses of action open to a trustee who holds an express power to resign but the sole lifetime beneficiary of the trust will not constructively engage in the appointment of a successor—or in resolving their own complaints about trust administration. The trustee applied to the Cayman Islands Grand Court (per Kawaley J.) for directions, which necessarily involved considering (1) the proper course for the trustee concerning ongoing trust administration given the predicament it faced and (2), in that context, whether the Court could pass the trustee’s accounts and determine the basis for approving its ongoing fees, costs and expenses. This analysis examines the Court’s reasoning and in particular the practical implications of the bespoke “held before the Court” regime approved in this case under principles the Judge aptly described as “not ‘run of the mill’ under Cayman trusts law.”

Trusts & Trustees
Harlem United (US), Landwirtschaftskammer Niedersachsen (DE), University of Charleston (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Legal principles and applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.