This study focuses on the discretionary inter vivos trust. It specifically investigates what the discretion of a trustee comprises and in which circumstances (if any) the court may amend the trustee‟s discretion as stipulated in the deed of trust. In order to make any meaningful conclusions, the different types of trusts, and more specific the way in which trusts are classified, needs to be researched. An inter vivos trust is classified as a contract for the sake of a third. Consequently contract law rules are applied in the interpretation and amendment of an inter vivos trust. The source, goal and tenor of a trustee‟s discretion, as well as the circumstances wherein this discretion may be amended, are investigated. The general rule is that courts have no discretion to amend a trust, but there is an exception to the rule. In accordance with article 13 of the Trust Property Control Act 57 of 1988 courts do have the power to amend or cancel the deed of trust in certain circumstances. In Potgieter and Another v Potgieter NO and Others 2012 (1) SA 637 (HHA) the court ruled that the power granted by article 13 does not enable judges to create law by amendment of the deed of trust according to their subjective interpretation of what is fair and just. The facts of the Potgieter case serve as problem statement for this study by focusing on the problems and unjust consequences of the strict application of contract law rules on a trust when the court does not take the changing circumstances of the trust founder into account. / LLM (Estate Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

This study focuses on the discretionary inter vivos trust. It specifically investigates what the discretion of a trustee comprises and in which circumstances (if any) the court may amend the trustee‟s discretion as stipulated in the deed of trust. In order to make any meaningful conclusions, the different types of trusts, and more specific the way in which trusts are classified, needs to be researched. An inter vivos trust is classified as a contract for the sake of a third. Consequently contract law rules are applied in the interpretation and amendment of an inter vivos trust. The source, goal and tenor of a trustee‟s discretion, as well as the circumstances wherein this discretion may be amended, are investigated. The general rule is that courts have no discretion to amend a trust, but there is an exception to the rule. In accordance with article 13 of the Trust Property Control Act 57 of 1988 courts do have the power to amend or cancel the deed of trust in certain circumstances. In Potgieter and Another v Potgieter NO and Others 2012 (1) SA 637 (HHA) the court ruled that the power granted by article 13 does not enable judges to create law by amendment of the deed of trust according to their subjective interpretation of what is fair and just. The facts of the Potgieter case serve as problem statement for this study by focusing on the problems and unjust consequences of the strict application of contract law rules on a trust when the court does not take the changing circumstances of the trust founder into account. / LLM (Estate Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014