Florida Statute 736.04115
“Judicial modification of irrevocable trust when modification is in best interests of beneficiaries”
What it means
Where §736.04113 asks whether circumstances defeated the settlor's purpose, this section asks a broader question: is compliance with the terms in the best interests of the beneficiaries? On the application of the trustee or a qualified beneficiary, a court may modify the trust if it is not.
The court must exercise that power in the way that conforms as closely as possible to the settlor's intent, given current circumstances — weighing the terms and purposes of the trust, the facts surrounding its creation, and relevant extrinsic evidence. A spendthrift clause is again only a factor. The tradeoff for the wider standard is a set of limits on which trusts qualify.
- Standard: compliance with the terms is not in the best interests of the beneficiaries — broader than §736.04113's purpose test.
- The court must conform as closely as possible to the settlor's intent, given current circumstances.
- It weighs the trust's terms and purposes, the facts of its creation, and relevant extrinsic evidence.
- A spendthrift clause does not preclude modification.
- Does not apply to trusts created before January 1, 2001, or to later trusts that must vest within the perpetuities period or that expressly prohibit judicial modification.
How it plays out
This is the flexible one — and the one with strings attached. Because it turns on the beneficiaries' best interests rather than a failed purpose, it reaches situations §736.04113 does not, which is why it shows up in trust restructurings and settlements. But the date and vesting limits catch people off guard: an older trust, or one drafted to run the full perpetuities period, can be outside it entirely. When we evaluate whether a trust can be modified, this is the section where we check the creation date first, because the answer can be no before the merits ever matter.
Where this shows up
Pages on this site where § 736.04115 does real work: