R v West Yorkshire, [1986] RVR 24

Can You Answer This?

Practice with real exam questions

Matthew, a retired musician, creates a trust for the benefit of all adult residents of the metropolitan region of Greenfield. He invests a substantial sum to ensure each beneficiary can receive meaningful support through discretionary distributions. The region has over two million adult residents with diverse personal and financial circumstances. The trust deed grants wide discretion to the trustees in deciding who among this vast group should receive funds. Almost immediately, the trustees raise concerns about the practical difficulties of overseeing such a large class.


Which of the following statements best explains the legal reason this trust might be found invalid under the principle of administrative unworkability?

Introduction

The rule of administrative unworkability in trust law states that a trust will not be valid if it cannot operate as the settlor intended. This rule arises from the requirement that a trust must be manageable and enforceable. Essential elements of a valid trust are a clear aim, specific assets, and identifiable beneficiaries. If a beneficiary group is too large or vague, the trust may not function.

The West Yorkshire Case and Administrative Unworkability

The House of Lords in R v District Auditor ex p West Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council [1986] RVR 24 considered a discretionary trust intended to benefit all residents of West Yorkshire, a group exceeding two million people. The court found the trust unmanageable due to the group’s size. Lord Wilberforce, in the main judgment, stated that a trust must be workable in its structure. He concluded that a group of this scale made it unfeasible for trustees to perform their duties effectively.

Certainty of Objects and Administrative Workability

The certainty of objects rule requires trustees to identify potential beneficiaries. While large groups are not inherently invalid, West Yorkshire shows that extreme size can render a trust’s goals unattainable. This differs from cases where beneficiary definitions are vague. Here, the group was defined (West Yorkshire residents), but its scale caused impracticality. This links precise beneficiary descriptions to practical management.

Conceptual Certainty vs. Evidential Certainty

A difference exists between conceptual certainty (clear group boundaries) and evidential certainty (proving membership). West Yorkshire did not challenge whether residency could be confirmed; the problem was solely the group’s size. This establishes administrative unworkability as an independent ground to invalidate a trust.

Examples of Administrative Unworkability

Beyond size, other factors can make trusts unmanageable. Trusts with excessively complicated or contradictory terms may leave trustees uncertain of their obligations. For example, a trust requiring distributions based on vague criteria might fail. Similarly, a trust demanding unrealistic actions (e.g., perfect market forecasts) would also be invalid.

The Implications of West Yorkshire

R v District Auditor ex p West Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council remains a key authority on administrative unworkability. It decided that trusts with defined beneficiaries can still fail if the group is too large or terms too unrealistic. This ruling emphasizes the need to draft trusts that can be feasibly managed.

Conclusion

The principle of administrative unworkability, as seen in R v District Auditor ex p West Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council, limits trust structures by requiring practical operation. While clear aim, assets, and beneficiaries are essential, administrative feasibility serves as an additional check against unworkable trusts. This case illustrates how trust law balances formal rules with practical constraints. Cases like McPhail v Doulton [1971] AC 424 established tests for beneficiary clarity, but West Yorkshire confirms that even defined groups may fail due to size. This highlights the importance of clear, realistic trust drafting.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of December 2024. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

Practice. Learn. Excel.

Features designed to support your job and test preparation

Question Bank

Access 100,000+ questions that adapt to your performance level and learning style.

Performance Analytics

Track your progress across topics and identify knowledge gaps with comprehensive analytics and insights.

Multi-Assessment Support

Prepare for multiple exams simultaneously, from academic tests to professional certifications.

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal