In 1997 the respondent and the appellant jointly purchased a property, contributing to the purchase price equally. The appellant and his family occupied the property. In 2007 the respondent was investigated for benefit fraud, and represented to the local authority that he had no beneficial interest in the property, being merely a nominal trustee for the appellant. He repeated that assertion in evidence before the Magistrates’ Court in defence of criminal charges, and later at the First-tier Tribunal in other proceedings. In March 2007 the respondent signed a form TR1 purporting to ...
T died in 2009, aged 96 years, leaving two adult children, her son, who was the claimant (C), and her daughter, who was the third defendant (D3). By a will document dated 25 September 2008, T appointed the first defendant (D1) and the second defendant (D2) as her executors. D1 was the daughter of D3 and T’s only grandchild. D2 was the solicitor who drafted the will document. Both remained neutral in the proceedings.
In June 2017, C brought a claim for probate in solemn form of the will document and for an order removing D1 and D2 as executors and appointing an independent personal...
Continue reading "Probate: Promises, promises"
Continue reading "Case report: CXB v North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2053 (QB)"
Continue reading "Evidence: Vox populi?"
The defendants were professional solicitor trustees of a trust established by the will of the claimants’ father. The claimants were the beneficiaries of the will trust, who were minors when their father died. The deceased’s will provided that the claimants’ shares would be held on trust for them until they turned 25, so the defendants invested the trust fund with the assistance of professional investment advice given by Taylor Young Investment Management Ltd (Taylor Young).
The claimants subsequently sought compensation from the trustees in the sum of £1,476,076 on the basis that ...
The late Lord Templeman (‘the deceased’) died on 4 June 2014 aged 94, leaving a will, dated 22 August 2008 (‘the 2008 Will’). The claimants commenced proceedings seeking an order pronouncing for the validity of the 2008 Will in solemn form. The 1st and 2nd defendants defended the claim on the basis that the deceased lacked testamentary capacity both when he gave his will instructions on 11 August 2008 and when the 2008 Will was executed. They counterclaimed for an order pronouncing for the validity of an earlier will, dated 25 April 2001 (‘the 2001 Will’) and a codicil to it, dated 3 Dec...