Having trouble interpreting this question:
“The ‘beneficiary principle’ is a requirement that there must be an ascertainable beneficiary or beneficiaries for a trust to be valid. The policy underlying this principle, and arguably the whole of
the law of trusts is that there must be a beneficiary in whose favour the trust can be exercised by the court and that there must be beneficiaries with proprietary rights in the trusts fund.”
Hudson A, Equity and Trusts, (2013) 7th ed at p.198.
Critically discuss this statement.
I'd be inclined to discuss how recent caselaw concerning non-charitable purpose trusts have weakened the beneficiary principle - but my course hasn't actually covered those yet. So I'm thinking I should discuss McPhail's problematic method of ascertaining beneficiaries, ways in which beneficiaries may not need to have proprietary rights, etc. Am I on the right lines? I'm really struggling with this question...