Enforcement: Out of reach

Ruth Kearns considers the creation of corporate structures in other jurisdictions to frustrate the enforcement of a financial remedy final order ‘Historical terms such as ‘‘façade’’ and ‘‘sham’’ in fact refer respectively to two separate and distinct principles: the ‘‘concealment principle’’ and the ‘‘evasion principle”.’ It is essential that the parties have confidence that remedies …
This post is only available to members.

SA v Sixteen Defendants Neutral citation: [2016] EWHC 3067 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2018 #172

The claimant was the sole corporate trustee of a trust created by a deed of settlement dated 5 November 1963 and made by a settlor for the benefit of his four children and their respective spouses and descendants. The defendants were two of the settlor’s surviving children, the widows of two deceased children and descendants to the 
fourth generation. As a result of deeds of appointment made on 28 March 1979 and 
31 December 1982, each of the settlor’s four children became entitled to a life interest in their respective one-quarter shares of the trust fund, with reversionary life interes...

Financial provision: One step at a time

Clare Williams and Holly Tootill review the circumstances in which a two-stage process to determine assets, and then entitlement, will be appropriate ‘Having a hearing to decide the extent of the asset base, and another hearing to conclude a financial order, is unusual but perhaps inevitable when the parties are very far apart on what …
This post is only available to members.

AAZ v BBZ [2016] EWHC 3234 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2017 #169

AAZ (W) applied for financial orders ancillary to her divorce from BBZ (H). H was the sole director of the second respondent C Ltd, a Cypriot registered company and the trustee of a Bermudian Discretionary Trust (the trust). P Ltd, the third respondent, is a Panamian company which H said was within the trust. P Ltd was said to hold the bulk of the wealth in the case. None of the respondents took any part in the trial. H was in breach of several court orders, including one compelling his personal attendance for the duration of the trial.

H and W had been married since 1993 when the...

Financial Provision: An open door

David Hickmott examines the Supreme Court decision in Birch v Birch and the importance of the discretionary jurisdiction in the family courts ‘The matter could, and should, have been more expeditiously dealt with had the parties addressed the court as to a proper inquiry into the merits of the wife’s application, rather than being derailed …
This post is only available to members.

Trusts: A fair result?

Mark Pawlowski examines the presumption of a resulting trust where assets are owned by a company ‘Where the funds for purchasing the assets come from the company controller, the likely approach (absent any contrary intention) is to apply resulting-trust theory so as to treat them as beneficial owner.’In what circumstances is it open to a …
This post is only available to members.

Trusts: Finding a way

Peter Steen and Robert Hines examine firewall legislation and the tension between legal fairness and economic expediency ‘It is evident that provisions of firewall legislation will prevail over questions of comity in circumstances where action by the trustees would result in them exceeding their powers under the trust.’ Asset protection, rather than legitimate tax mitigation, …
This post is only available to members.

Haastrup v Okorie [2016] EWHC 12 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2016 #160

This was an application to strike out, or alternatively, for summary judgment in relation to, a claim in relation to the estate of Captain Haastrup brought by the claimant.

Captain Haastrup died on 8 October 2012 in England. On 20 January 2014, the claimant obtained letters of administration in Nigeria. On 20 June 2014, these letters were resealed in Leeds District Probate Registry. It subsequently emerged that the claimant had been injuncted by the Nigerian court to restrain him from relying on the letters of administration or from ‘parading himself as in any way as the ad...

Non-Disclosure: The Watergate effect

Max Lewis reflects on the impact of Sharland and Gohil and outlines the key points applied by the court in AB v CD ‘Inferences can be drawn from a failure to properly answer questions about post-order transactions that are adverse to what that party said about the position at the time of the order.’It is …
This post is only available to members.

Beneficial Interests: Defeating creditors: a how (not) to guide

Rupert Higgins considers some cases highlighting the problems with hastily created declarations of trust ‘A guide to defeating creditors is long overdue. So here, too late for Mrs Rahman but for the benefit of readers, is a bluffers’ guide to bluffing.’As controversial political figures go, it would be hard to find a candidate in recent …
This post is only available to members.