In A and 6 others v C and 13 others [2026] UKPC 11 (on appeal from Bermuda), the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council delivered an authoritative ruling on the scope of powers held by protectors in offshore private wealth structures.
The dispute concerned whether trust protectors holding consent powers over capital distributions were restricted to a narrow supervisory watchdog role (ensuring trustees acted lawfully) or held a wider substantive power allowing them to withhold consent based on their own independent assessment of the merits.
Judicial Determinations
- Rejection of "Narrow Supervisory" Rule: The Board unanimously rejected the binary formulation adopted by the Bermudian courts. Absent an explicit limitation in the trust instrument, protectors are entitled to exercise their own independent judgment on the substantive merits of trustee proposals.
- Fiduciary Duties Preserved: The Board confirmed that protectors act as fiduciaries subject to proper-purpose constraints, but those duties do not require deference to trustee decisions.
- Drafting Imperative: Settlors seeking to confine protectors to a purely administrative or supervisory oversight function must insert express, unambiguous language into the trust deed.
- Source: Consult Burges Salmon’s legal guide on Protectors and Powers of Consent in Offshore Trusts: Guidance from the Privy Council.
Privy Council (Bermuda Appeal): Independent Merit-Based Powers of Trust Protectors (A v C)