In the case of Macwell v Dalton, the court was tasked with determining the certainty of objects under a

discretionary trust. A discretionary trust is a type of trust in which the trustee has the discretion to
decide how to distribute the trust property among the beneficiaries.

In this case, the trust provided that the trustee had the power to distribute the trust property to any of
the named beneficiaries "as the Trustee thinks fit." The court held that, in order for a trust to be valid,
the objects of the trust must be certain.

This means that the trust must specify who the beneficiaries are and what their entitlements are. In the
case of a discretionary trust, the objects of the trust are the class of potential beneficiaries, rather than
specific individuals.

The court found that the language of the trust in this case was sufficient to establish the class of
potential beneficiaries and to give the trustee the discretion to distribute the trust property among
them as he saw fit.

Therefore, the court held that the objects of the trust were certain and the trust was valid. The decision
in Macwell v Dalton established that, in order for a discretionary trust to be valid, it must specify the
class of potential beneficiaries and give the trustee the discretion to distribute the trust property among
them. This helps to ensure that the objects of the trust are certain, which is necessary for the validity of
any trust.

Several cases have applied the principles established in Macwell v Dalton, including Re Gartside, Re
Endacott, and Re Staveley.

In Re Gartside, the court considered the validity of a trust that provided that the trustee had the
discretion to distribute the trust property to any of the named beneficiaries "as the Trustee thinks fit."
The court applied Macwell v Dalton and held that the language of the trust was sufficient to establish
the class of potential beneficiaries and to give the trustee the discretion to distribute the trust property
among them as he saw fit.

In Re Endacott, the court was asked to determine the validity of a discretionary trust that provided for
the distribution of the trust property to "such of the children of the settlor as the trustees in their
absolute discretion think fit." The court applied the principles established in Macwell v Dalton and held
that the language was sufficient to establish the class of potential beneficiaries. Therefore, the court
found that the objects of the trust were certain and the trust was valid.

In Re Staveley, the court ruled that a discretionary trust providing for the distribution of trust property
to "such of the children of the settlor as the trustees in their absolute discretion think fit" was valid
because the language of the trust established a clear class of potential beneficiaries and gave the
trustees discretion to distribute the property among them. This ruling followed Macwell v Dalton.

Overall, the decision in Macwell v Dalton is significant because it provides guidance on how to
determine the certainty of objects under a discretionary trust. It establishes the requirements for the
validity of a discretionary trust and helps to ensure that trusts are properly administered and that the
rights of the beneficiaries are protected