• news-banner

    Expert Insights

Guiding Trustees: A Protector’s right to indemnity and a trustee’s right to reimburse settlors

Chapter 3

In a previous instalment on a trustee’s right to indemnity, we explored the basic underlying principles and headline points on the changeover of trustees (this article can be found here if you missed it).

This week, we will consider (a) whether another fiduciary – the protector – can enjoy a comparable expectation of an indemnity as the trustee and (b) the trustee’s ability in certain limited circumstances to reimburse the settlor. 

Exploring the Protector's Right to Indemnity

The scope and nature of the role of protectors is an emerging area of law, subject to recent and widely reported judicial scrutiny. For this article’s purposes, we will focus purely on the extent to which a protector is entitled to an indemnity from the trust fund.

A “protector” does not hold trust property but is instead granted bespoke powers and obligations under the trust deed. One very common power is to remove and replace the trustee.   

It is common for a protector to be granted a right to reimbursement of expenses incurred in carrying out its duties under the terms of a trust deed. Where a protector is a fiduciary, it is likely that the same principals will apply to a protector as to a trustee in that such an indemnity will be restricted to expenses reasonably or properly incurred: this was discussed in the Bahamian Supreme Court decision in Patton v Alvarez (2017/CLE/gen/00777).

What if there is no express provision for the protector to be indemnified?

Although the trust deed in the above case contained express provisions (rather than being silent on the matter so as to put the availability of an implied right to indemnity to the test), the court confirmed that at least in The Bahamas it was ‘settled law that a protector’s legal status in relation to costs and his right of indemnity in trust proceedings are analogous to that of a trustee if the protector has fiduciary functions’. It is likely open to a protector acting in a fiduciary capacity lacking an express indemnity to rely on one being implied under the general law by analogy with a trustee.[1]

Of course, there is one key practical difference between protectors and trustees. Unlike the trustees, the protectors are not in possession of the trust fund and therefore unable to reimburse themselves directly. The result is a two-stage reimbursement: first, the trustee reimburses the protector and then, relying on its own right to be indemnified, the trustee reimburses itself from the trust fund. In practice, this will more than likely be a single payment from the trust assets to the protector. The trustees, as fiduciaries, are likely to have duties to satisfy themselves that an expense claimed by the protector is properly incurred and liable to be reimbursed (under the trust deed or general law), depending on the precise terms of the trust.

Key Takeaway: Establishing Clarity in Protector's Right to Indemnity

Our message for trustees in respect of their indemnity outlined in our previous article was that it is always advisable to have clear, professionally drafted, express provisions within the trust deed – and this applies equally to the scope of a protector’s right to indemnity, given the relative lack of developed law in this area. This minimises the opportunity for disagreement and misunderstanding between the trustee and the protector, maintaining a harmonious working relationship which is better for everyone.

When can a Settlor be reimbursed from the Trust Fund?

The simple answer to this question is “it depends” – principally on in what capacity a settlor might seek to be reimbursed.

The overarching principle of trust law is that when a settlor transfers assets into trust, they are relinquishing control of those assets in favour of the trustee subject to the terms of the trust deed.

The primary concern for the trustee when deciding whether to meet a request for reimbursement of an expense by the settlor (or anyone for that matter) is that it must be clear that doing so is a reasonable and proper expense of the trust such that the trustee can rely on their right to be indemnified from the trust fund. If it is not a trust expense, but simply a liability of the settlor, the trustee would need to be able to benefit the settlor as a beneficiary in that separate capacity.

Sometimes, UK legislation can shift liability for tax relating to the trust from the settlor to the trustee (eg section 201 Inheritance Tax Act 1984). Specific tax advice should be taken in any given circumstance but, by way of example, this can arise when the settlor fails to pay the tax due on the creation of the trust. Where a UK trustee is liable for the tax liability under the domestic law, the situation is relatively straightforward. However, it is not necessarily so in a cross-border trust structure since, under the conflict of revenue laws rule, deriving from the decision in Government of India v Taylor ([1995] AC 491), common law jurisdictions tend not to enforce the revenue laws of the other (absent, for example, a treaty framework). A trustee is therefore only authorised to pay foreign taxes from the trust fund if (i) the liability is enforceable on the trustee in their home jurisdiction or (ii) if authorised by an express provision in the trust deed. In both these examples, the payment of any tax liability would be a “proper expense” and the trustee would be entitled to rely on their right to be indemnified from the trust fund. 

Key Takeaways: Navigating Settlors' Reimbursements

  • The trustee should always seek professional advice if unsure whether to authorise a reimbursement or payment of a tax liability.
  • The trustee could, in particularly complex situations, either seek an indemnity from the beneficiaries or, if this is not possible, directions from the relevant court (where available) as to whether to (i) make the reimbursement or (ii) pay the foreign tax liability. Court-sanctioned action should provide comfort that the amounts spent are covered by the trustee’s right to be indemnified out the trust fund. 

Conclusion

Understanding which, and whose, expenses can be met from the trust fund is essential to trust management.

In this article, we explored the protector's right to indemnity and emphasised the importance of clear provisions in the trust deed in avoiding conflicts.

We also examined the settlor's limited potential for reimbursement. Where the settlor is not a beneficiary of the trust, the trustee will need to be satisfied that it is a proper and reasonable expense of the trust. Specialist advice should be taken where a settlor has failed to pay tax due on the creation of the trust – the trustee’s position being made less straightforward in cross border trust structures. 

[1] See Holden on Trust Protectors para 7.32

Our thinking

  • Martyn’s Law / the Protect Duty: new Bill published

    Rory Partridge

    Insights

  • The Financial Times quotes Sophie Dworetzsky on the potential watering down of Labour’s non-dom tax plans

    Sophie Dworetzsky

    In the Press

  • Swiss estates: would a 50% tax on the super-rich be appropriate?

    Alexia Egger Castillo

    Quick Reads

  • Bloomberg quotes Dominic Lawrance on the impact of phasing out the non-domicile tax status in the UK

    Dominic Lawrance

    In the Press

  • “This is going to hurt” – potential implications of the forthcoming Budget on financial arrangements on divorce

    Charlotte Posnansky

    Quick Reads

  • Buying and Selling Swiss Property – Tips for Non-Swiss Nationals and Non-Swiss Residents

    Sophie Hart

    Insights

  • How the forewarned ‘hike’ on private school fees is going to bite – a family law and Private Office perspective

    Jemimah Fleet

    Quick Reads

  • Asian Private Banker quotes Dominic Lawrance and Julia Cox on anticipated tax changes in the UK

    Dominic Lawrance

    In the Press

  • Benoît Pasquier and Alex Needham write for City AM on ensuring a more equitable future at the Olympic Games

    Benoît Pasquier

    In the Press

  • Regime change: The beginning of the end of the remittance basis

    Dominic Lawrance

    Insights

  • Prosperity Prep: Equipping the Next Generation for Wealth and Business Success

    Patrick Chan

    Events

  • Hubbis quotes Jeffrey Lee on succession planning

    Jeffrey Lee

    In the Press

  • Thomas Moran and Ruth Morris write for Prime Resi on the future of London's prime property market

    Thomas Moran

    In the Press

  • Budgeting for change: what should Landed Estates be doing before the Budget?

    Sarah Wray

    Quick Reads

  • The Telegraph quotes Dominic Lawrance on anticipated tax changes and the impact on non-doms

    Dominic Lawrance

    In the Press

  • Charles Russell Speechlys makes first Partner promotion in Singapore and moves to One Raffles Quay

    Jeffrey Lee

    News

  • Relocation to Italy: Italian Lump Sum Tax Regime

    Nicola Saccardo

    Insights

  • Adviser.ca quotes Robert Reymond and Jonathan Rothwell on the abolition of the UK non-dom regime and options available for existing non-doms

    Robert Reymond

    In the Press

  • Serge Vittoz and Daniel McDonagh write for City AM on selection for the Paralympics and Olympics and potential disputes

    Serge Vittoz

    In the Press

  • Asian Private Banker quotes Silvia On and Jeffrey Lee on the growth of our Asia offices

    Jeffrey Lee

    In the Press

Back to top