International pensions: Running out of options

Ellie Foster highlights the ways in which overseas pensions may be addressed and the need to plan ahead for changes post-Brexit ‘Post-Brexit, unless parties can rely on the primary grounds of jurisdiction, enforcing foreign orders against pensions in this jurisdiction may be at best difficult or at worst impossible.’ The Pension Advisory Group (PAG) report …
This post is only available to members.

Divorce: A matter of trust

Oliver Auld gives the lowdown on what happens to trusts in the event of a divorce ‘Trustees need to be aware of not only the range of orders the family courts can make in relation to trust assets, but also the strategies they should potentially be adopting in the best interest of their beneficiaries, both …
This post is only available to members.

Pensions: Off limits

Francesca Norris highlights the implications of the decision in Goyal v Goyal as to orders that may be made in relation to foreign pensions ‘The judge at first instance purported to make an order “ancillary” to the “statutory functions” under MCA 1973, however, given he had overtly accepted the court’s lack of power to make …
This post is only available to members.

HN v AN [2005] EWHC 2908 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2016 #160

HN (the wife) married AN (the husband) on 30 September 2001. In July 2000 they had chosen a property known as Brooklands Farm (Brooklands) to be their future matrimonial home; it had been purchased in July 2000 for £725,000 by a Bahamian company called WP Ltd, which was owned by a Guernsey trust called the F Trust.

The F Trust was created on behalf of AN’s grandparents by a trust deed dated 19 January 1989. In 1998 various beneficiaries had received distributions in satisfaction of their respective entitlements and from this date only AN remained a beneficiary. In July 2000...

Nuptial Settlements: Break it up

Antonia Barker outlines P v P, which sheds light on the circumstances in which a trust will be considered a nuptial settlement ‘Practitioners should be aware that even where the ultimate trust is not a nuptial settlement, any individual settlement of an asset into that trust, or even the right to occupy a trust property, …
This post is only available to members.

Quan v Bray & ors [2014] EWHC 3340 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2015 #150

In 2000 Li Quan (the wife) created a charity called Save China’s Tigers. In 2002 her husband Stuart Bray (the husband) established a fully discretionary trust in Mauritius called the Chinese Tigers South Africa Trust (CTSAT) – the sole beneficiary of which was the charity.

In July 2012 the wife was removed as a director of the charity and in August 2012 she filed for divorce and made no mention of the trust. On 17 July 2013 she filed an application by way of amendment to her form A seeking a variation of the post nuptial settlement. The core of her case being that CTSAT was ...

AB v CB & anr [2014] EWHC 2998 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | January/February 2015 #146

This was an application for ancillary relief following the wife’s divorce petition of October 2012, upon which decree nisi was pronounced on 17 April 2013. At the time of these proceedings the wife was 44 years of age, and the husband was 41. On paper, the husband had almost no assets and a modest income. However, the husband came from a family of great wealth with substantial lands in Pembrokeshire which they had owned for generations. His financial security was therefore absolutely assured.

The wife and the husband had first met in 1999. They had married in February 200...

DR v GR & ors [2013] EWHC 1196 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | July/August 2013 #131

A post-nuptial settlement (being a Jersey discretionary trust) was created by a husband and wife in 1986. The trust owns a Liberian company, which in turn owns a UK company that owns two UK companies. The main company assets are two UK retirement villages. The beneficiaries included the husband and wife and two minor children.

During divorce proceedings the wife applied for a variation of the settlement.

Over the course of proceedings the trustees of the Jersey trust and the companies were all joined as parties. In both cases no application was made for joinder and no not...