Today’s post considers the above-mentioned topic in a ‘vidcast’.
As usual, an edited transcript of the presentation for those that cannot (or choose not) to view it is below.
One of the most interesting family law trust cases is what I refer to as The Blues Brothers case, otherwise known as Morton and Morton.
In this case, there were two brothers, the Blues Brothers as I call them.
They were both shareholders of the corporate trustee. They were both directors of the corporate trustee. They were the two primary beneficiaries and joint appointors of the trust. The trust itself owned the bucket company 100%. The bucket company’s two directors were the two brothers. You’re likely starting to see the pattern.
Brother one busts up with his wife. His wife says, “He is the 50% owner - all day every day he is 50%. Therefore, I get half of his 50% end of story.”
The court said, “No, he’s not 50%. Because he has no casting vote, because he is an equal appointor, equal shareholder, equal director, he’s received broadly equal distributions, he’s not 50%. He is a 0%.” Therefore, the assets of the trust were protected.
Some will argue here, “Hang on Matthew, that’s quite unique, we’re not always going to be able to set up with 2 siblings.” Agreed and understood. But if you’re looking at wider succession of a family unit and protection of intergenerational wealth, we believe the principles from The Blues Brothers case are seriously important to have in mind.
As always thanks to the Television Education Network for the video content here.
** for the trainspotters, a classic song from the Blues Brother today, ‘Gimme some lovin’.