Commentary

32 The revised ratio of Hastings-Bass

POWERS OF APPOINTMENT vol 33
| Commentary

32 The revised ratio of Hastings-Bass

| Commentary

32 The revised ratio of Hastings-Bass

The Court of Appeal and Supreme Court concluded that the true ratio of Hastings-Bass1 was more limited. In Pitt v Holt; Futter v Futter Lloyd LJ, referring to Warner J’s decision in Mettoy2, said:

‘The principle on the basis of which the judge decided this aspect of the case cannot, in my judgment, be found in the decision in Re Hastings-Bass itself. What the trustees did in relation to the Mettoy pension scheme was within their powers, on any basis3.’

Mummery LJ said:

‘... these appeals provide examples of that comparatively rare instance of the law taking

To continue reading
View the latest version of this document, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial