The provisions contained within the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 now makes sure that a correct balance is achieved between the rights of trustees and those of beneficiaries under a trust.

Discuss.

This requires you to draw comparisons between the regime that existed before TLATA 1996 with that post TLATA. Whilst little knowledge of case law is required, it is key that you are familiar with the various provisions under TLATA and how a trust of land differs from a trust for sale.

A key focus for your answer may be the duty to sell that trustees had in respect of a trust for sale. You should analyse the problems that this produced, for example

• the predisposed position of a court to order a sale upon receipt of an application to sell under s 30 LPA 1925;
• the fact that beneficiaries had no right to occupy the trust property by virtue of the fact that their interests were seen as lying in the purchase monies through the doctrine of conversion;
• the fact that this duty no longer reflected the changing social attitudes towards the purpose for holding land.

Consider further how the rights of beneficiaries under trusts for sale were limited. This might include an analysis of their limited rights of consultation, giving power to the trustees to ignore the beneficiaries wishes for example.

Focus then upon how TLATA 1996 tried to correct this imbalance. You could consider, for example:

• the abolition of the doctrine of conversion: s 3 TLATA 1996;
• the replacement of a duty to sell with a mere power to do so under a trust of land;
• beneficiaries rights to occupy trust property under certain circumstances: s 12 TLATA 1996;
• beneficiaries right to be consulted by trustees under s 11 TLATA 1996;
• beneficiaries powers to appoint trustees in certain circumstances under s 19 TLATA 1996.

Perhaps conclusions should evaluate whether TLATA 1996 has achieved a correct balance between rights of trustees and beneficiaries. Will the courts interpret the sections of TLATA so that a balance can be achieved. Consider, for example, the influence of pre TLATA case law upon a court when considering s 15 TLATA criteria in reaching a decision upon a s 14 TLATA sale application.