The Court appointed a non-professional, non-independent trustee company owned and directed by beneficiaries in preference to a purportedly independent professional trustee, where the defendant failed to adduce evidence of the proposed professional trustee's independence, consent, credentials, resources, or the trust's capacity to fund professional remuneration. While acknowledging that an independent trustee would be desirable given inter-beneficiary conflict, the Court held that on the evidence the beneficiary-owned entity was the best available appointment having regard to the welfare of beneficiaries under the Miller v Cameron test.
The full text is available to signed-in members.