Florida Statute 736.04113
“Judicial modification of irrevocable trust when modification is not inconsistent with settlor's purpose”
What it means
This is Florida's deviation statute — the way a court adjusts an irrevocable trust while staying true to what the settlor was trying to do. On the application of the trustee or any qualified beneficiary, a court may modify the terms, terminate the trust, or direct or forbid particular acts.
It acts on any of three grounds: the trust's purposes have been fulfilled or become illegal, impossible, wasteful, or impracticable; because of circumstances the settlor did not anticipate, following the terms would defeat or substantially impair a material purpose; or a material purpose no longer exists. A spendthrift clause is a factor the court weighs, but it does not block modification.
- Brought by a trustee or any qualified beneficiary — the workhorse statute for a trust whose circumstances outran its terms.
- Ground one: the purposes are fulfilled or have become illegal, impossible, wasteful, or impracticable.
- Ground two: unanticipated circumstances mean compliance would defeat or substantially impair a material purpose.
- Ground three: a material purpose no longer exists.
- The court may amend, terminate, authorize a prohibited act, or forbid a permitted one.
- A spendthrift clause is a factor, not a bar — the court may still modify.
How it plays out
This is the section we reach for when a trust made perfect sense the day it was signed and no longer does — a purpose overtaken by events, an administrative term gone unworkable, a restriction that now wastes the fund. The drafting lesson runs the other way: a settlor who writes down which terms are essential and which the trustee may vary hands the court a priority list, so a judge applying §736.04113 follows the settlor's ranking instead of guessing. We push clients to be specific about material purpose for exactly that reason.
Where this shows up
Pages on this site where § 736.04113 does real work: