Successor trustees and indemnities after Naaman v Jaken [2025] HCA 1

Abstract

When a trustee leaves office, its right of indemnity survives—but its worth depends on the successor. In Naaman v Jaken Properties Australia Pty Ltd [2025] HCA 1, a 4:3 High Court of Australia held that a successor owes its predecessor no fiduciary duty not to deliberately defeat that indemnity. Once the fund is dissipated, the former trustee—whose interest ranks ahead of the beneficiaries’—has no personal claim against the successor or its dishonest accomplices, while subordinate beneficiaries do. We argue the majority decision was wrong and that English courts, applying Equity Trust, are unlikely to follow it.