North Shore Ventures Ltd v Anstead Holdings Inc [2012] EWCA Civ 11
September 2012 #122The substantive action concerned a written agreement between North Shore Ventures Limited (North Shore) and Anstead Holdings Inc (Anstead) made in March 2003 (the agreement). In 2008 Anstead’s assets were transferred into trusts of which Mr Fomichev and Mr Peganov (the appellants) and their family members were discretionary beneficiaries (the trusts). On 20 August 2008 North Shore issued a claim against Anstead and the appellants for monies owing under the agreement. On 21 June 2010, Newey J gave judgment against the appellants for sums in excess of $50m. On 9 March 2011, the Court...
Central Bank of Nigeria v Williams [2012] EWCA Civ 415
June 2012 #120In 1986, Dr Williams (D) participated in a transaction under which, he alleges, he was defrauded of $6,520,190. He commenced proceedings on 10 March 2010 against Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) alone, asserting that: an English solicitor, Reuben Gale (R), held that sum of money in his client account in trust for D on terms that he would only release it if and when certain funds had been paid in Nigeria; in May 1986 R fraudulently paid away $6,020,190 of the sum held by him for D to the account of CBN with Midland Bank in England; CBN was party to the fraud; and R retained the balance of $5...
Barrett v Bem & ors [2012] EWCA Civ 52
May 2012 #119Martin Lavin (the testator) died on 11 January 2004 in Hammersmith Hospital leaving a will in which he left everything to his sister Anne Liston whom he also appointed executor (the will). Anne died on 04 November 2004 having obtained probate of the will in June 2004. Her daughter, Hanora Bem was appointed her executor. Hanora wrote out the will at Hammersmith Hospital on the day of the testator’s death. The testator was alleged to have signed the will at approximately 3.30pm on the date of his death. It was purportedly witnessed by two staff nurses.
In May 2007, proceedings were ...
Howard v Howard-Lawson [2011] EWHC 63 (Ch)
May 2012 #119Philip John Canning Howard (testator), who died on 22 April 1934, was entitled to landed estates but his only child was a daughter who married and had issue with Sir Henry Joseph Lawson Bt. The testator was concerned to ensure the continuance of the association of his family name and arms with his landed estates, and by his will, he settled them on trusts that were designed to prevent his descendants from disentailing them for as long a period as possible, but made the enjoyment of possession by each successive remainderman conditional on adopting the name and arms of Howard. Each tenant...
Marley v Rawlings & anr [2012] WTLR 639
May 2012 #119Alfred Thomas Rawlings (H) and Maureen Catherine Rawlings (W) were husband and wife who, on 17 May 1999, signed mirror wills leaving their entire estate to each other or, if the other failed to survive, to the appellant who was treated as their son. The respondents, who were their natural sons, were excluded but stood to benefit on intestacy if the wills were invalid. In the event, by mistake H signed W’s will and W signed H’s will but the error was not noticed then, or on the death of W. It was only noticed after the death of H in August 2006 when a dispute arose as to whether the estat...
K v L [2012] WTLR 153
January/February 2012 #116On H’s ancillary relief claim, Bodey J awarded him a sum of £5m pursuant to an open offer made by W. W had assets worth approximately £57m and H had assets of approximately £300,000, represented by the former matrimonial home which was transferred to him by W in the course of the divorce. The couple began cohabiting in Israel in 1986, and underwent a ceremony of marriage that was not valid under Israeli law. They married legally in England in 1991, where they have lived ever since. The length of the relationship was 21 years and there are children from the marriage. Substantially the who...
Lane v Cullens Solicitors & ors [2011] EWCA Civ 547
December 2011 #115The claimant was the brother of the deceased. She died intestate on 22 January 1997. The claimant became her personal representative pursuant to a grant of letters of administration made on 2 August 2000. The claimant was entitled to one third of the deceased’s estate there being two other stirpital branches of the family. One such branch was represented by the claimant’s brother. The claimant’s niece who was entitled to one sixth of the deceased’s estate intimated a claim that she was entitled to the deceased’s home. She did this in October 1998. The claimant, while being advised by sol...
Drake v Harvey & ors [2011] EWCA Civ 838
November 2011 #114Mr and Mrs H, their son A and their daughter F were partners in a partnership engaged in farming. The partnership was governed by a partnership deed dated 14 February 1989. One of the assets of the farming partnership was farmland worth approximately £5.5m. Mr and Mrs H ceased to be partners as a result of their loss of mental capacity. They have since died. A ceased to be a partner on his death and therefore F was the only surviving partner.
The partnership capital was originally divided into A and B capital and additional capital. By clause 6 of the partnership deed, A capital h...
Moriarty v BA Peters [2008] EWCA Civ 1604
November 2011 #114
BA Peters plc (the company) carried on a business consisting of activities connected with boats, including their sale or purchase both on its own account and as broker for clients. It operated two bank accounts – client and current. When the company went into administration on 14 August 2007 its current account was substantially overdrawn but there was a balance on its client account amounting to £850,544.44. KPMG LLP, whose employees were the joint administrators, concluded on an analysis of the client account that the payments in originated either from sums received on be...
Barclays v HMRC [2011] EWCA Civ 810
November 2011 #114The trustees (the bank) appealed from the decision of Vos J to dismiss an appeal against a determination by HMRC. HMRC had decided that the residuary estates of Constance and William Poppleston were to be treated as if they were part of the estate of Edwin Poppleston (the son of Constance and William) because s89 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (the Act) required Edwin to be treated as if he had an interest in possession in each of them. If Edwin was not to be treated as if he had such interests in possession then HMRC was liable to repay the bank £158,963 with interest.
Edwin wa...