Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Schmidt v Rosewood Trust Ltd [2003]. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 9 page paper examines the case of Schmidt v Rosewood Trust [2003] 2 WLR 1442 (also cited as Schmidt v Rosewood Trust Ltd [2003] UKPC 26). The paper examines six elements; the facts, the law, the decision, fairness, consistency and problems in the future. The bibliography cites 8 sources.
Page Count:
9 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS14_TEschmidt.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
as this is an issue that has been of interest to many pension schemes over the last few years. We can assess this by looking at six elements; the facts,
the law, the decision, fairness, consistency and problems in the future. Facts The plaintiff; Mr Schmidt was the son of the executors, who was a director of Lukoil,
the largest Russian oil company. Mr Schmidt senior set up two trusts in a very complex manner, the aim of which were to hide his identity. The defendant; Rosewood Trust
Ltd, a company located in the Isle of Man, were the trustees. In between the creation of the trusts and the time of Mr Schmidt seniors death more that US
$105 million had been received by the trust. The compliant of Mr Schmidt junior, the plaintiff, was the concern that the trustees were taking too much in charges. The
charges brought by Mr Schmidt claimed that Rosewood were in breach of both the trust and their fiduciary duty. In the first instance Schmidt gained an order to prevent Rosewood
from dealing with the trusts assets and also to disclose information. The information that was gained under this order then appeared to raise more questions than it answered so
the plaintiff sought to gain more information. This time the basis for the discovery was not based on the existing order, but due to his status as beneficiary of the
trust due to the discretionary trust and expectations of then trusts where he claimed to have a personal interest and also an interest as the executors (his father) representative.
There was an order made by the Isle of Man court for further disclosure, but Rosewood appealed, the main thrust of the appeal was that Mr Schmidt was unable to
...