Australia: Breach of trust by professional trustee – even with prior legal advice!

Last Updated: 26 November 2019
Article by Gerard Basha

A trustee has onerous statutory and general law duties and obligations to beneficiaries of the trust. The expected standard in the performance of its legal duties and obligations by a professional trustee, in the business of providing trustee services, is higher than that expected of an individual who is trustee.

The recent case of Kerr v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd; Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd v Fuller and others trading as Sparke Helmore Lawyers [2019] NSWSC 1279 is a good example of the higher expectation imposed on a professional trustee.

The case found that Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd (AET) was guilty of a breach of trust even with AET's reliance on prior legal advice from Sparke Helmore Lawyers (the lawyers). This was despite the lawyers conceding in Court that their advice with its many assumptions and qualifications, was "useless and worthless". The problem for AET was that the judge, Stevenson J, concluded at [341] that part of the advice obtained "was one no reasonable trustee could have relied on."


AET was the trustee of a trust established by a 1964 trust deed. The trust was a commercial trust that involved a forestry scheme concerning pine forests growing on land owned by a company. The beneficiaries (investors) in the scheme were referred to as 'Covenantholders'.

The forestry scheme predated managed investment schemes which are now regulated by Chapter 5C of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The forestry scheme was regulated by State legislation which required an approved deed containing a number of statutory covenants. The trust deed for the forestry scheme was an approved deed.

There were other agreements relating to the scheme that were entered into by AET and the various involved companies. AET had registered 'Encumbrances' over the scheme land to protect the interests of the investor beneficiaries.

Corporate acquisitions resulted in the involved companies granting a fixed and floating charge to ANZ Capel Court Ltd (ANZ) in February 2010. In early 2011, the involved companies decided to sell the land and the trees growing on the land. The trust deed provided that the sale of the land required the consent of AET.

The case revolved around the circumstances in which AET obtained legal advice and consented to the sale proposal.

After obtaining legal advice, AET consented to the sale proposal. In the events that happened, the involved companies were placed into external administration in September 2011, long before they were obliged to make any payment pursuant to the scheme and the proposal. The sale and other proceeds were lost and AET and the beneficiaries received no money at all.

AET commenced legal proceedings against the receivers of the involved companies claiming the receivers held the sale and other proceeds on trust for the investor beneficiaries. AET had success in the Victorian Supreme Court and the Victorian Court of Appeal. However, AET's claim was ultimately dismissed by the High Court of Australia in Korda v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd (2015) 255 CLR 62.

A beneficiary, Mr Armour, began to agitate in June 2015 for documents, information and explanations concerns the loss to the trust.

Sparke Helmore continued to act for AET. They denied any liability by AET, advised Mr Armour that any legal proceedings commenced by him had no prospects of success and that they would seek indemnity costs from him.

In January 2016, Mr Armour requested that AET cease to act as trustee or that it appoint an additional independent trustee to consider any possible legal claims against AET. He even offered to fund any further investigation. AET continued to refuse his requests.

Legal proceedings were commenced by Mr Armour for the appointment of an additional trustee. The Court appointed Mr David Kerr (Kerr) as an additional trustee of the trust to pursue claims against AET and their lawyers (Sparke Helmore).

Prudently, prior to commencing any proceedings, Mr Kerr obtained judicial advice from the NSW Supreme Court pursuant to s63 of the Trustee Act 1925 (NSW) that he would be justified in bringing the proceedings against AET and its lawyers.

It was claimed by Mr Kerr that AET breached its duty as trustee:

(a) to protect and vindicate the rights attaching to trust property, being described as the Encumbrances;

(b) by failing to comply with its duty expressly imposed under the trust deed 'to exercise all due diligence in carrying out its functions and duties and in watching the rights and interests of the beneficiaries; and

(c) in equity, to exercise the same care as an ordinary prudent businessperson would exercise in conducting the business as if it were their own.

AET cross-claimed by seeking to rely on the advice from Spark Helmore asserting it:

(a) did not breach its duty to the beneficiaries; or

(b) should be exonerated for any such breach or be excused from liability under s85 of the Trustee Act 1925 (NSW) or its South Australian equivalent.

An alternate claim was also made by Mr Kerr against Sparke Helmore which was similar to AET's claim against Sparke Helmore.

The amount of Mr Kerr's claim (with interest) to the conclusion of the hearing was estimated to be $82.46 million.


The Court found that AET had committed a breach of trust. It was in fact conceded during the hearing by counsel for AET that some of its decisions fell "below the standard of a prudent trustee". However, counsel for AET said that AET's answer to the breach of trust claim was to point to the Sparke Helmore advice.

AET had failed in a number of its duties as trustee. The failures included that it did not protect the trust properly by releasing the Encumbrances without first obtaining payment of the amounts owing or by procuring suitable substitute security. It also overlooked the ANZ fixed and floating charge to the detriment of the beneficiaries.

In relation to the Sparke Helmore legal advice, AET called a solicitor, Mr John Schembri, as an expert witness on its behalf. However, the Court held that notwithstanding the expert evidence, AET obtaining Spark Helmore's advice did not, without more, exonerate it from the consequences of its breach of trust. The Court found that the advice Sparke Helmore gave was not adequate, holding that any reasonable trustee would not have relied on that advice. In any event, the Court was satisfied that AET would have proceeded even if it had received adequate advice from Sparke Helmore. AET's cross-claim against Sparke Helmore failed.

In order to be excused from its breach of trust under s85 of the Trustee Act 1925 (NSW), AET had to establish that it "acted honestly and reasonably, and ought fairly to be excused."

It was noted at [516] of the judgment (in relation to a s85 exoneration) the relevant comments of the High Court in Elder's Trustee & Executor Co Ltd v Higgins (1963) 113 CLR 426 at [452]:

"although a professional trustee is not beyond the protection of the section 'such a trustee would have to establish a strong case before the court would apply the section in its favour'.."

The Court held that AET was not excused for its breach of trust under s85 of the Trustee Act 1925 (NSW) or its South Australian equivalent.

Mr Kerr was entitled to recover equitable compensation from AET for the amount sought by him, except for a small amount dealing with AET's costs in related legal proceedings.


The case has many different lessons, depending on your perspective. Some of these lessons include:

  1. Trustees are ordinarily entitled to rely on legal advice. However, this does not obviate the need for the trustee to carefully review the factual assumptions and limitations on which the advice is based to ensure they are correct and appropriate in the circumstances.
  2. Trustees prudently seeking legal advice to protect their position and the interests of the beneficiaries need to think carefully about the purpose and scope of the advice being sought. This was a failing of AET in the case. The retainer with Sparke Helmore was to review the documents and give the requested specific advice – they should also have been retained to negotiate the terms of the transaction.
  3. A trustee prudently seeking legal advice to protect its position should not commit to a proposal or transaction before receiving the legal advice sought. Perhaps AET could have indicated in all communications that its consent was subject to legal advice and due diligence to ensure that the interests of the beneficiaries were properly protected.
  4. It is a fact of life that trustees are often faced with important commercial decisions that need to be made within pressing time limits. Sometimes the decision to be made in the best interests of the beneficiaries may not be entirely clear. At [323] Stevenson J said of AET's position:
  5. "It is hard to contemplate a circumstance where AET could, consistently with its duties as trustee, consent to a sale......if to do so would materially prejudice the interests of Covenantholders (beneficiaries). It may be, however, that there could be a circumstance where AET could give such consent if there was some reduction in the protection afforded to Covenantholders; for example where some countervailing benefit was simultaneously to be conferred on the Covenantholders – such as prompt payment."

Trustees in a position of uncertainty and risk should keep in mind the comments of the High Court in the Macedonian Church case [2008] HCA 42. It was said in that case it may be more prudent for trustees in difficult situations to first obtain the protection of judicial advice under s63 of the Trustee Act 1925 (NSW) rather than later relying on the uncertainty of the Court having to determine whether s85 can relieve the trustee from personal liability for breach of trust in the events that had happened.


Trustees, including professional trustees, perform a valuable and needed service. The law expects a high standard of professional trustees in the performance of their legal duties and obligations. Legal advice and/or judicial advice may be appropriate in difficult circumstances. However, prudent risk management requires trustees to ensure that the factual background and assumptions on which any legal advice or judicial advice is based on are correct and appropriate.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions