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...

Futter & anr v HMRC; Pitt & anr v HMRC [2013] WTLR 977

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

The first appeal concerned two settlements, made with non-resident trustees, by Mr Futter. Considerable ‘stockpiled’ gains were rolled up while the trusts were non-resident and, in exercise of the powers conferred by the trusts, new resident trustees were appointed and capital was distributed to Mr Futter and his children in the mistaken belief that the ‘stockpiled’ gains, which would be attributed to them, would be absorbed by allowable losses that had been realised, so that no liability to capital gains tax would arise. In advising as to the effect of s87 of the Taxation a...

Day & anr v Day [2013] EWCA Civ 280

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2013 #130

The appellants appealed from a first instance decision by Mr Recorder Chapman QC on 15 May 2012, which refused their application for an order for rectification of a conveyance that was executed on behalf of their mother (Mrs Day) by her solicitor (Mr Froud) who was acting as her attorney. The conveyance was dated 6 June 1985. The conveyance had transferred Mrs Day’s home from her sole name into the names or her and her son (the respondent) as beneficial joint tenants. The purpose of the transaction was to enable borrowing to be secured against the property by the respondent. Mrs Day died...