Right to occupy under a trust of land: muddled legislative logic?

Reflects on whether a rational foundation exists for the right of occupation granted to beneficiaries under a trust of land by the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. Reviews the historical background to the right, the advantages of its statutory basis and factors which suggest the absence of any underlying doctrinal cohesiveness, including the Act's failure to provide a definition of "unsuitable for occupation". Examines case law on the extent to which the right is underpinned by three conflicting principles of beneficiary autonomy, various aspects of trustee authoritarianism and settlor interposition. Compares the right to occupy the matrimonial home under the Family Law Act 1996 s.30 and suggests possible options for reform.