Where there is a power of accumulation capable of being
exercised, its very existence is sufficient to negate any interest
in possession. This is one limb of the Pearson case where it was
held that such a power may be said to arise and affect the trust
income ‘at source’.
Very broadly, the accumulation power has priority over the
provision that appears to give the interest in possession. Such a
trust is non-interest in possession.
