Protectors as ‘mere toothless tigers’? Advocating in favour of the ‘Wider View’

Abstract The author considers the varying recent approaches of the High Court of England and Wales, the Royal Court of Jersey, and the Supreme Court of Bermuda in the construction of protectors’ powers to consent to or to veto a proposed distribution. These authorities have been instrumental in delineating the distinction between the ‘Narrower View’ and the ‘Wider View’. The Narrower View only permits the protectors a discretion to bless a valid and rational decision, but not to veto the exercise of powers of trustees. In contrast, the Wider View confers protectors as fiduciaries with an independent decision-making discretion when deciding whether to give their consent to the exercise of powers by the trustees. This article advances arguments in favour of the ‘Wider View’.