spendthrift clause

19:25 Nov 4, 2018 

Germaine raises a highly important point. This is legal text and I don't think you can afford to make approximations. The answer you have chosen may well be wrong.

17:25 Nov 3, 2018 

Well... and my point is to exclude "inaliénabilité", which appears to me as inappropriate in this context.

"Antiprodigalité" is the subject matter. Is it a valid suggestion? It might be. Is it the right suggestion? Research still is necessary (I don’t have time right now, but will get there, juste par curiosité) as well as more context.

Dans le doute, "clause protective" rend à tout le moins la notion/le concept, surtout s’il ne s’agit que d’un titre et si le seul texte sous ce titre est celui soumis plus tôt par Evelyne. Le cas échéant, je suis d’accord avec Eliza: la phrase en question apparaît comme une lapalissade.

17:15 Nov 3, 2018 

My point was to exclude your translation {clause d'anti-prodigalite"

16:23 Nov 3, 2018 

La clause dit: "Une disposition dans une fiducie qui restreint la capacité d’un bénéficiaire de transférer des droits à des paiements futurs du revenu ou du capital de la fiducie à un tiers. En effet, la clause empêche les bénéficiaires prodigues de dilapider un héritage avant de l’avoir reçu et protège également l’héritage d’un bénéficiaire contre des créanciers."

Cette clause n’interdit pas à un héritier de vendre une propriété dont il aurait hérité (= aliéner un bien hérité); elle lui interdit de transférer ses droits à un paiement futur à un tiers. Je n’utiliserais pas le terme "inaliénabilité" dans ce contexte; ce n’est pas la notion de fond: le bénéficiaire peut dépenser les fonds reçus; ce qu’il ne peut faire, c’est donner le droit de recevoir ces fonds à un tiers.

15:56 Nov 3, 2018 

La définition en anglais is claire: il s'agit d'interdire l'aliénation de biens hérités.

A provision in a trust that restricts a beneficiary's ability to transfer rights to future payments of income or capital under the trust to a third party. In effect, the clause prevents "spendthrift" beneficiaries from squandering an inheritance before they receive it and it also protects a beneficiary's inheritance from creditors.

15:45 Nov 3, 2018 

J’aurais donc tendance à retenir "clause antiprodigalité", mais force est d’admettre que l’expression ne court pas le Net... D’un autre côté, à la lecture du document mentionné en référence, "clause protective" pourrait être une solution s’il s’agit d’un simple titre.

15:28 Nov 3, 2018 

Eliza a raison: la fiducie et la clause sont deux choses différentes. La clause fait normalement partie d’une fiducie - on ne dirait pas que ce soit le cas ici -, mais c’est le "spendthrift trust" qui est une fiducie en soi:

The "spendthrift trust " is an American institution, developed by case law in some states and by statute in others, under which the beneficiary is unable to transfer his future entitlement to income or capital to another.
RENVOIS ANAL. (V. AUSSI): alimentary trust (81583), protective trust (80497)
ÉQUIVALENT 1: fiducie-prodigalité (f.) - PONDÉRATION: Normalisé par PAJLO
Fiducie dont l'acte constituant stipule que toute cession par le bénéficiaire de son droit de participation est nulle. - CTTJ, Vocabulaire de la common law, tome II.
CONSTAT 1: fiducie antiprodigalité - SOURCE 1: Traduction non attestée.
CONSTAT 2: fiducie à participation protégée - Vocabulaire de la common law...
CONSTAT 3: fiducie à participation protégée - Décisions, Cour suprême du Canada
CONSTAT 4: fiducie de prodigalité - SOURCE 4: Traduction non attestée.
CONSTAT 5: fiducie du prodigue - SOURCE 5: Grenon, Aline, Les fiducies
http://www.juriterm.ca/

15:46 Oct 31, 2018 

Is "spendthrift clause" just a header or title within the will?

And can I ask, what's the jurisdiction (state or country in which this will is being probated/administered)? Just asking because I find that language odd. It seems redundant or unnecessary because normally, in the US jurisdictions I'm familiar with, a creditor of A can't get their hands on B's estate until the assets that A is supposed to inherit actually pass to A. It's not the job of B's executor to pay A's debt; it's only their job to pay B's own debts (if B had any outstanding debt at the time of B's death).

And above all, A's creditors can't get those assets because what if A dies before B's assets are distributed? Then they would go to B's contingent beneficiary, "C," who may have no connection to A. A's creditors can't take B's or C's property. They have to wait until it's A's property.

And I would think that in a jurisdiction where A's creditors COULD get their hands on inherited assets before those assets were legally owned by A, nothing B could say in B's will would change that. So this just sounds odd to me. But then I'm not an estates & trusts expert, though I do have some experience with it.

14:54 Oct 31, 2018 

Thank you all: internet problems, just got your answers.
my estate while in the hands of my Executor and prior to distribution thereof, shall not be subject to the debts, contracts, engagements, taxes, guarantees of the beneficiary or any other legal process whatsoever by any creditor otherwise of said beneficiary.

14:15 Oct 31, 2018 

I agree with Eliza - we need this additional context please. This is legal stuff and you cannot afford to make approximations.

09:23 Oct 31, 2018 

Evelyne, your post says this is a clause in a will, so the will must create a testamentary trust (if it were just bequeathing assets to heirs, a spendthrift clause would not be possible). Can you provide more context, specifically what it says about who the trustee is (i.e. is the trustee someone other than the beneficiary -- presumably yes but I am just making sure), and what trust assets can be used for?

I'm asking because without that context, I don't know if François Boye's proposed translation is accurate. Usually in the US when we talk about spendthrift trusts or spendthrift clauses in trusts, we mean this:

1. The beneficiary is only to receive income (i.e. interest/dividends), not principal, except that the trustee may pay out principal for certain purposes (typically "health, education, maintenance and support," i.e. health, education and basic living expenses);

2. The beneficiary can't sell or give away trust property or their rights in it; and

3. Trust assets are protected from the beneficiary's creditors.

Is that what this will creates? If so, that's broader than a clause de l'inaliénabilité.

08:59 Oct 31, 2018 

Here's a discussion of what a fiducie testamentaire is (under Quebec law): https://blogues.desjardins.com/coopmoi/2017/10/qc-pourquoi-c...

And here's the description of a testamentary trust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testamentary_trust

As you can see, they're essentially the same thing. A trust (or to be exact, the trust documents) may contain a spendthrift clause, but they don't have to, and in any case a trust and a spendthrift clause are two different things.