When delegation of trusts duties occurs => Duty to control delegates under case law:

Following the Trustee Act 2000, trustees may delegate all but the most essential functions of their
office. Discuss.

TA 2000  SPECIFIC CONTEXT OF DELEGATION OF TRUSTEE POWERS

What principles to use regarding governing manner trustees are to be held responsible for any failure
to control actions of anyone to whom their powers are delegated?

Speight v Gaunt – ordinary prudent man of business. HELD: Trustee could not be held liable for breach
of trust when he passed a cheque to the broker and broker absconded with the $$!Trustee acted in
ordinary manner of business being conducted, cant subject trustee to any higher principles than that.

Re Vickery – Trustee gave money to solicitor who absconded with it… Central issue was if trustee was
negligent in employing solicitor OR letting $ remain in solicitor’s hands. HELD  NO LIABILITY ON
TRUSTEE UNLESS THERE HAS BEEN SOME WILFUL DEFAULT BY HIM BEING SOMETHING MORE THAN
MERE LACK OF CARE. So if there was no willful default on trustee’s part, he acted in good faith in
hiring solicitor, then OK, no breach of duty.  pins to the CONSCIENCE of trustee…… OR recklessness
in trustee in City Equitable Fire

From Re City Equitable & Fire Insurance , Re Vickery can be criticized! Company law  refer to AOA!

(1) Willful default VS Want of reasonable care.

(2) Trustees can go and delegate their duties to professionals who specialize in those speicif
careas.. Anything goes wrong, trustees can go sue delegate for negligence, raud, breach of
contract for failure of delegates to perform their functions properly!!!

Academic Critique regarding Duty to control delegates under case law:

Pg 415-416 (not so impt, but FYI)

drt