The manager effectively monitors the delegated functions and manages the risks associated with the delegation. To this end, the manager has the expertise and resources to control the delegated functions at all times. The manager defines in the agreement his right to information, inspection, accreditation and access, as well as his rights of instruction and supervision vis-à-vis the delegate. The manager also ensures that the delegate properly monitors the performance of the tasks entrusted and adequately manages the risks associated with the delegation; The effects of this exemption essentially mean that third-party beneficiaries, even if they have not signed the agreement, can go to court to assert their rights under the agreement. It should be noted that the courts have refused to simply apply this exception and require the intention to build trust and use the third party to bring it into force. The courts have also established several tests to determine the intent of the parties and often check whether there is a written agreement signed by the litigants that would prove an arbitration agreement.1Holding that there was no written agreement in the specific case, the review in point 7. The above conclusion focuses on the teaching of the privity of contract between parties to a fiduciary structure, which is the subject of a thorough review. The SC in Vimal Shal also found that a compromise clause in a trust deed does not meet the requirements of a valid arbitration agreement, as required by arbitration law, because of the lack of proposal and acceptance between the agent and the beneficiaries. In order to examine the reasons for the implicit prohibition of trust litigation, it is possible to consider the common principle of the “privity of contracts” law, which embodies the statement of the SC`s reasons set out in Vimal Shah, and the exceptions to that doctrine may be considered. The principle essentially means that only the parties to an agreement can assert their rights and commitments against each other. There are two aspects of the principle: 13 4 The SHC found that, in trust cases, “agents or/and beneficiaries are only required to implement the provisions of the fiduciary decision. Therefore, there can be no agreement between the persons in trust or the beneficiaries to carry out such an activity. If this were the case, the directors/beneficiaries would have to make a proposal and any acceptance for each clause of the guardianship commission.
That would be pure absurdity, and we therefore do not believe that such a situation can be abandoned. (6) National legislation applicable to the custodian designation contract and any subsequent agreement must be indicated. In view of its obligation to monitor under the 2011/61/EU Directive, the custodian should set up a procedure to improve compliance with the applicable fia legislation and rules, as well as its rules and constituent acts.