Allowable Investments

Posted In


The investments a trustee can make are governed by sections 27-31 of the Trustee Act. The general rule pertaining to a Trustee’s power of investment is that a trust instrument can define the Trustee’s powers of investment. Trustees are bound by the instructions in the trust deed; the trust’s funds must be invested in strict accordance with the powers granted the trustee, regardless of what may be allowed by the Trustee Act. Should the trust instrument remain silent on investment powers, then, historically speaking, trusts were for the most part confined to judicial and later statutory lists of authorized investments.

In 1999 and 2001 changes were made to the Trustee Act. One of the changes was the abolition of the legal list approach. The legal list approach was replaced by the prudent investor approach. Under this amended legislation “a trustee must exercise the care, skill, diligence and judgment that a prudent investor would exercise in making investments”. A trustee may now invest trust property in any form of property in which a prudent investor might invest; thus, one must act as a prudent person of discretion and intelligence would act in one’s own affairs.

The prudent investor approach provides the trustee with a broader selection of investment choices. The legislation now specifically permits trustees to make certain investments such as in mutual funds and common trust funds. The Trustee Act also lays out the mandatory investment criteria which a trustee is obliged to consider when investing trust property. There are seven criteria in section 27(5) of the Trustees Act:

  1. General economic conditions.
  2. The possible effect of inflation or deflation.
  3. The expected tax consequences of investment decisions or strategies.
  4. The role that each investment or course of action plays within the overall trust portfolio.
  5. The expected total return from income and the appreciation of capital.
  6. Needs for liquidity, regularity of income and preservation or appreciation of capital.
  7. An asset’s special relationship or special value, if any, to the purposes of the trust or to one or more of the beneficiaries.

Substitute Decisions Act

The Substitute Decisions Act governs what may happen when someone is not mentally capable of making certain decisions about their own property or personal care. There are three possible ways for a decision maker to be appointed: a) through a “continuing power of attorney,” b) through “statutory guardianship,” and c) through a guardian of property by the court. The attorney may be given the authority to make any type of decision related to the person’s property that the person could make themselves, except make a will. However, the power of attorney may put conditions on how the property is to be managed. For example, it might say that loans to individuals or certain types of investments cannot be made.

Under section 15(1) of the Substitute Decisions Act, if a certificate is issued under the Mental Health Act certifying that a person who is a patient of a psychiatric facility is incapable of managing property, the Public Guardian and Trustee is the person’s statutory guardian of property. The statutory guardian of property will be the Public Guardian and Trustee unless a family member or other authorized person applies to the Public Guardian and Trustee to assume this role. A person who replaces the Public Guardian and Trustee as statutory guardian of property shall, subject to any conditions imposed by the Public Guardian and Trustee or the court, manage the property in accordance with the management plan.

The property management portions of the Act, (sections 31-42) refer to a “guardian of property”. In this section of the Act, the guardian of property can fall under two different standards.

These standards are found in sections 32(7) and (8) of the act:

  1. 32(7) a guardian who does not receive compensation for managing property shall exercise the degree of care, diligence and skill that a person of ordinary prudence would exercise in the conduct of their own affairs.
  2. 32(8) a guardian who receives compensation for managing the property shall exercise the degree of care, diligence and skill that a person in the business of managing property of others is required to exercise.

In addition to the standard of care, a guardian must make required expenditures from an incapable person’s property. The requirements are outlined under Section 37(1) of the Act. The guardian must put the financial needs of the incapable person first and if there are funds left over, the needs of the person’s dependents are the next priority. After that, if there is money still available, it may be spent to satisfy the person’s other legal obligations. When making these latter required expenditures, the guardian must also adhere to the guiding principles under Section 37(2). Optional expenditures such as gifts, loans and charitable donations are allowed under the Act. The guiding principles for how money may be spent are under section 37(4).

In doing all of this, guardians must keep accounts of all transactions

Keep This Information For Future Use

Download this PDF now

Related Articles

Scratches on a Car - Injury Law - Publications

Motor Vehicle Accident Claims: FAQs

If you cannot easily locate a phone number for your insurance company, contact your insurance broker. They will put you in contact with the appropriate person to report your claim.

Read Article
Publications Punitive Damages in Motor Vehicle Litigation

Punitive Damages in Motor Vehicle Litigation

In McIntyre v. Grigg et al (2006) 83 O.R. (3d), 161, the Court of Appeal, for the first time, considered the issue of whether punitive damages were available in the context of a motor vehicle accident claim. I had the privilege of arguing this appeal after my partner David Smye obtained a very favourable verdict from a Hamilton jury. While the majority in the Court of Appeal upheld the jury’s award for punitive damages, the quantum of the award was reduced substantially.

Read Article
Publications Claims of Privilege

Claims of Privilege

Particularly with the advent of no-fault insurance schemes, more and more people are finding themselves embroiled in litigation with their insurance companies. Whether an insured is bringing an action against their insurer for failing to pay accident benefits, disability benefits, life insurance benefits or property damage claims, a common allegation in any Statement of Claim is that the insurer breached its duty to act in good faith.

Read Article
Publications Road Design and Maintenance Actions

Road Design and Maintenance Actions

In tort law, there are few areas that are subject to as much judicial and legislative attention as liability of public authorities for the design and maintenance of roadways. This is a field of law that is very much driven by statute. The Municipal Act, 2001, SO 2001, c 25 and the Public Transportation and Highways Act, RSO 1990, c P.50 and regulations made under those Acts contain a number of provisions that potentially shield road authorities from liability for otherwise negligent actions or omissions. Those provisions are not infrequently varied, changed or repealed. Any change can lead to uncertainty and litigation.

Read Article
Publications Cross Border Jurisdictional Questions

Cross Border Jurisdictional Questions

Michael Winward received his LL.B. from the University of Western Ontario in 1983. He was called to the Bar of Ontario in 1985 and immediately commenced employment with Mackesy Smye LLP, becoming a partner in 1990. Michael restricts his practice to civil litigation with an emphasis on personal injury and insurance litigation. Michael has enjoyed being a trustee of the Hamilton Law Association and has sat on a number of its committees.

Read Article
Publications Significant Auto Insurance Savings

Significant Auto Insurance Savings

Imagine yourself standing at the bakery counter of your local grocery store. There is a sign that reads bread is 15% off. You ask for a loaf but notice that the baker has cut it in half. Fifteen percent off but for half a loaf. You say that you want a full loaf. The baker says that would cost an extra 30%. Would you buy the loaf? Of course not. The only person benefiting from this deal is the baker. Yet, this is what Premier Wynne has put onto the people of Ontario when it comes to auto insurance. Here is how it works if, for example, a car driver ran a stop sign, broadsided your vehicle and you were injured.

Read Article
Templates Library
Loading, Please wait...
The Library cannot be open, please try it again later.
This field is required.
Invalid email format.
Some of the fields are not filled or invalid.
Form Template
Select a Form Template
Available fields in the selected template: