Introduction
This essay examines the landmark case of McPhail v Doulton [1971] AC 424, focusing on Lord Wilberforce’s pivotal statement regarding the concept of administrative unworkability in the context of discretionary trusts. The case, often recognised as a turning point in the law of trusts, addressed the validity of trusts where beneficiaries form a wide or potentially unmanageable group. Lord Wilberforce’s obiter remark about a class as broad as “all the residents of Greater London” being potentially unworkable introduces a critical principle in trust law concerning the balance between clarity of intention and practical enforceability. This essay will explore the legal context of the decision, analyse the implications of Lord Wilberforce’s comments on administrative unworkability, evaluate the test of certainty of objects in discretionary trusts, and consider how this case has influenced subsequent judicial interpretations. By engaging with academic commentary and case law, the essay aims to provide a sound understanding of this principle and its relevance to trust law, while acknowledging certain limitations in its practical application.
Legal Context of McPhail v Doulton
McPhail v Doulton, also known as Re Baden’s Deed Trusts, emerged from a dispute over a discretionary trust established for the benefit of employees, their relatives, and dependants of a company. Prior to this case, the test for certainty of objects in discretionary trusts was stringent, as establishe
