A & ors v D & ors [2017] EWHC 2222 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2017 #169

A & B were the current trustees of a settlement known as the Children’s Trust dated 21 March 2000. They were, with C, the current trustees of a settlement known as the M Trust dated 7 December 2004 (together the ‘Settlements’). A was the settlor of the settlements. D, E & F were his three minor children. G was joined in as a person appointed to represent a class of unborn beneficiaries. The settlements were drafted to qualify as accumulation and maintenance trusts within the requirements of Section 71 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (‘1984 Act’). Both made provision for a class o...

Trusts: Breaking the blank

In Ong v Ping the court considered a trust where the property held had not been identified. Oliver Hilton explains ‘Where the parties’ intention can be clearly and sufficiently ascertained from the available material and circumstances, the court will not be hamstrung by mere formalities, and will rarely hesitate in finding a way to give …
This post is only available to members.

Vaughan-Jones & anr v Vaughan-Jones & ors [2015] EWHC 1086 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | September 2015 #152

The claimants were the executors of the will of the deceased dated 8 September 2000 whereby his residuary estate passed to his widow and three sons in equal shares absolutely. The first defendant was the deceased’s widow and the first claimant and second and third defendants were his sons.

Under the will, inheritance tax would be payable on the estate in respect of land and farming assets which did not qualify for agricultural property or business property relief on the three quarters of the residuary estate which had passed to the deceased’s sons. The beneficiaries decided that t...

Giles v Royal National Institute for the Blind & Ors [2014] EWHC 1373 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | October 2014 #143

The claimant claimed as the administratrix of the estate of Ellen Bolton (Ellen) for rectification of a deed of variation by which she had purported to vary the will of Hilda Bolton (Hilda).

Hilda had died on 6 February 2006. Her sister, Ellen, died on 11 September 2007. By her last will Hilda had benefited Ellen in two respects: as the beneficiary of a specific devise of a particular freehold property (the property) at clause 2(a) of the will and also as the sole residuary beneficiary under clause 5 of the will. As Ellen survived Hilda these gifts took effect. The gifts were char...

Oatley & ors v Oatley Powney & ors [2014] EWHC 1956 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | October 2014 #143

In January 1995 Mr Donald Oatley, his wife Mrs Patricia Oatley, their three sons Andrew, Martin and Michael (the three claimants), and a solicitor, Mr Boyd, signed a deed of settlement. The beneficiaries were the spouses and issue of the claimants. Mrs Oatley died in 2002. Mr Oatley contracted cancer in 2006 and died in January 2007.

The Oatleys own a farming company with 4,333 shares owned by each claimant and 13,001 by the settlement. In 1985 Mr and Mrs Oatley created two discretionary trusts for some of their shares of the company, with the beneficiaries being their issue and ...

Short-Term Trusts: Time trials

Simrun Seehra looks at recent case law on rectification of a deed of variation ‘It is not always clear whether a variation results in property being held in trust for a period ending not more than two years after the death and drafting errors have been made which mistakenly define the length of a discretionary …
This post is only available to members.

Kevern v Ayres & anr [2014] EWHC 165 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | April 2014 #138

Raymond Ayres deceased died intestate on 4 June 2008. The claimant is the deceased’s sister and the first defendant his wife.

As the deceased left no issue, his estate devolved according to the intestacy rules. Accordingly, his chattels and a statutory legacy of £200,000 went to the first defendant absolutely and the remainder of his estate was divided equally between the claimant and first defendant.

In these circumstances, the first defendant intimated a claim for reasonable financial provision from the deceased’s estate. Given the potential for post-death i...

Rectification: A case of doubt

Jennifer Seaman sets out the lessons to be learned from Re Hampel Discretionary Trust ‘It is important to get clear evidence as to the intentions of the parties to the trust deed or settlement up to the date of the deed or settlement and at the time the deed or settlement was executed.’ The remedy …
This post is only available to members.

Re the Hampel Discretionary Trust 1999 [2012] EWHC 2395 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | October 2013 #133

The claimants purchased a property in Cornwall in 1999. Their intentions were to create a discretionary trust of which they were to be the initial trustees, in favour of a class of beneficiaries consisting of their children and grandchildren and any further person or class of person nominated by the trustees. It was also intended that they should both be excluded from any possibility of benefit under the trust for inheritance tax reasons. In particular, they were concerned that there should be no reservation of benefit within the meaning of s102(1)(b) of the Finance Act 1986...

Wills v Gibbs & ors [2007] EWHC 3361 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2012 #120

The testator (T) died on 11 January 2005 leaving his share of the farming business they carried on together to the third defendant (PW) together with land. PW wished to exercise the opportunity to vary T’s will by deed of variation so as to pass this inheritance to his son, the claimant (RW) and so avoid the possibility of the disposition being a lifetime transfer taking effect as a potentially exempt transfer (PET) giving rise to an Inheritance Tax (IHT) liability should PW die within seven years of the gift. PW was concerned that opportunity to make such a deed might be swept awa...