Under the Trustee Act 1925, when can the Court relieve liability of a personal representative?

Under the Trustee Act 1925, when can the Court relieve liability of a personal representative?

• A. The personal representative acted honestly and reasonably
• B. The personal representative failed to act with due care
• C. The estate is insolvent
• D. The grant of probate is delayed

Answer: (A)

The key idea here is relief from liability for a personal representative under the Trustee Act 1925. The court can excuse all or part of a personal representative’s liability for a breach of trust if the person has acted honestly and reasonably, and ought fairly to be excused for the breach. This recognises that administering an estate can be complex and mistakes can occur, but genuine good faith and reasonable care should shield someone who handled the duties properly. So why this is the best answer: acting honestly and reasonably captures the standard the court uses to decide whether to relieve liability. If the representative has done their best in good faith, even if a mistake happened, the court may grant relief. The other scenarios described—failing to act with due care, insolvency of the estate, or delays in probate—do not by themselves justify relief from liability under this provision.

The key idea here is relief from liability for a personal representative under the Trustee Act 1925. The court can excuse all or part of a personal representative’s liability for a breach of trust if the person has acted honestly and reasonably, and ought fairly to be excused for the breach. This recognises that administering an estate can be complex and mistakes can occur, but genuine good faith and reasonable care should shield someone who handled the duties properly.

So why this is the best answer: acting honestly and reasonably captures the standard the court uses to decide whether to relieve liability. If the representative has done their best in good faith, even if a mistake happened, the court may grant relief. The other scenarios described—failing to act with due care, insolvency of the estate, or delays in probate—do not by themselves justify relief from liability under this provision.