Public Trustee v Butler [2012]

Key Notes

• Facts: The case involved a trust that referred to "deserving relatives" as beneficiaries. The term "deserving" created uncertainty about who would qualify.

• Outcome: The court held that the term "deserving relatives" was too uncertain to form a valid trust.

• Reasoning: Similar to Re Wright’s Will Trusts, the court found that the inclusion of a vague and ambiguous term like "deserving" made the beneficiary class too uncertain to enforce the trust.

Impact & Analysis

• Uncertainty in "Deserving": The case reaffirmed that any ambiguity, such as in the term "deserving," renders the trust invalid. The court emphasised that for a trust to be enforceable, the beneficiaries must be identifiable with certainty.

• Following Precedent: This case is consistent with Re Wright’s Will Trusts, highlighting that ambiguity in the description of beneficiaries can lead to the failure of the trust.