Book Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1878 edition. Excerpt: ...(e). 3. But where a receiver (who is, of course, a constructive trustee) made several journeys to Paris, in order that he might be present at the hearing of a suit brought in the French courts in relation to the trust property, and it appeared that his presence was wholly needless, the whole question being one of French law, and not of fact, his travelling expenses were disallowed, on the ground that they were under the circumstances improperly incurred (/). 4. And so where trustees attempted, at the solicitation of their cestuis que trust, some of whom were married women without power of anticipation, to sell the trust property before the date named in the settlement, it was held that they were not entitled to be indemnified against the costs of an action for specific performance brought against them by the purchaser (g). Art. 57.--Protection against the Acts of Co-trustee. A trustee is not answerable for the receipts, acts, or defaults of his co-trustee (), save only: --a. "Where he has handed the trust property to him without seeing to its proper application. /3. Where he allows him to receive the trust property without making due inquiry as to his dealing with it. y. Where he becomes aware of a breach of trust, either committed or meditated, and abstains from taking the needful steps to obtain restitution and redress, or to prevent the meditated wrong. (e) Macnamara v. Jones, Dick. (g) leedham v. Chawner, sup. 587. (a) Dawson v. Clarke, 18 V. (/) Malcolm v. O'Callagfian, 3 254; and as to settlements made M. & C. 62. since, see 22 & 23 Vict. o. 35, And even in these three cases he may, by express declaration in the settlement, be made irresponsible (b). Illust.--Thus in the case of Wilkins v. Hogg (c), -which now...