Wright & anr v Gater & anr [2011] EWHC 2881 (Ch)
April 2012 #118Edward Greenstreet died intestate on 28 October 2009 and his estate of £514,600 passed to his son, Kieran. Kieran died intestate on 17 May 2010. Kieran’s estate of £6,000, combined with the estate of Edward, passed to Kieran’s three year old son, Rory Greenstreet. The aggregated estates were held on statutory trusts for Rory contingently on his attaining 18 or marrying or forming a civil partnership under that age.
Kieran’s personal representatives were Ellen Wright (Kieran’s partner and Rory’s mother) and Michael Greenstreet (Kieran’s uncle). ...
Alexander v Alexander & ors [2011] EWHC 2721 (Ch)
March 2012 #117By his will, dated 20 March 2006, William Owen Rawlings (the testator) left Wisteria Cottage, Sneachill, Spetchley, Nr Worcester, to the claimant and first defendant as trustees, to hold on trust for the third defendant (who was his step-granddaughter), for her lifetime and, thereafter, for her children at 21 in equal shares. The testator died on 3 October 2007, from which date the cottage was empty and fell into dereliction. The third defendant, who was living in Germany, had no wish to reside in the cottage. Section 6 of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 and s8 of...
Hubbard & anr v Scott & ors [2011] EWHC 2750 (Ch)
January/February 2012 #116The claimants were default beneficiaries who, in the event, stood to benefit under the terms of the will of Albert Wiseman (testator) dated 25 November 1997. They and their mother, who were longstanding friends of the testator, visited him at his home after the death of his wife. However, their visits tailed off during the last years of his life and, at some stage after May 2006, a neighbour introduced the testator, then aged 84, to the third defendant who initially worked for him as a cleaner. There was a dispute of fact as to whether this occurred over three years or under three months...
Shah v Shah & ors [2011] EWHC 1902 (Ch)
January/February 2012 #116Unfair prejudice had been established by the petitioner (Dinesh) in the conduct of the affairs of the third respondent (the company). In an earlier judgment dated 24 February 2010, Roth J had ordered that either the first respondent (CJ) or the company must purchase Dinesh’s shareholding. The following matters remained to be determined:
- (a) the price to be paid for the shares;
- (b) whether interest should be payable and, if so, at what rate and for what period;
- (c) whether the purchaser should be CJ or the company; and
- (d) what provision s...
Ahluwalia v Singh & ors All ER (D) 113
January/February 2012 #116The claimant was the daughter of Mr Gurwak Singh (the deceased), who died on 23 March 2009. The first defendant was the deceased’s son and had obtained a grant of probate of what he claimed was the deceased’s last will, which was dated 3 May 1999.
The claimant brought an action seeking an order for revocation of the grant of probate, pronouncing against the purported will and for the appointment of an independent person to administer the estate. The action was brought on the basis that the purported will had not been properly executed pursuant to s9(c) of the Wills Act...
Claridge, Re The Trustee In Bankruptcy of [2011] EWHC 2047 (Ch)
December 2011 #115Mr and Mrs C lived together with their family in the property that they had bought and owned jointly. Mr C went bankrupt for the first time in 1996. Mr C’s trustee in bankruptcy sold his half share of the property to Mrs C for £8,000 in 1998 and thereafter Mrs C owned the full beneficial interest in the property, subject to the original mortgage. In 2002 the property was remortgaged. The funds derived paid for the repayment of the original mortgage, the costs of remortgaging, £2,000 was used to pay off a personal debt of Mrs C and the remainder was used to renovate the propert...
Cowderoy v Cranfield [2011] EWHC 1616 (Ch)
December 2011 #115Mrs Blofield (D) was in her 80’s and owned her own home worth around £140,000. Her only son (R) was an alcoholic and seriously ill. He moved into her house in 2002 and remained there until he died, intestate, on 5 August 2006. He had fathered several children. One was adopted and others taken into care but they paid no part in his life or that of his mother, D. He did, however, have a legitimate daughter, the claimant, Mrs Leigh Cowderoy, (C) who inherited his estate. Relations between C and R were strained and there was very little contact between C and D because of this although ...
Cowderoy v Cranfield (costs) [2011] EWHC 2628 (Ch)
December 2011 #115The claimant had challenged the last will of the deceased dated 13 November 2006 (the deceased had died on 19 October 2008) on the bases of (1) lack of testamentary capacity, (2) want of knowledge and approval and (3) undue influence. The claimant failed on all those bases. The decision of Morgan J can be found at [2011] EWHC 1616 (Ch). On the issue of costs the claimant contended that there should be no order as to costs up to and including 26 September 2010 and thereafter that she should pay the defendant’s costs on the standard basis such liability not to be enforced without the...
Dominion Corporate Trustees Ltd & anr v Capmark Bank Europe plc [2010] EWHC 1605 (Ch)
December 2011 #115The claimants were trustees of a Jersey property unit trust formed on 17 March 2006 as the vehicle for the purchase of warehouse premises (the property). It was arranged that the vendor of the property would transfer the property to the trustees in return for units, which would then be sold by the vendor to the purchasers. The purchasers were Cantabria Investments Limited (Cantabria) as to 99% of the units and Catalunya Investments Limited (a wholly owned subsidiary of Cantabria) as to 1%. Cantabria was partly owned by Glenmac Limited (Glenmac). Half of Glenmac’s share capital was ...
Howell & ors v Lees-Millais & ors [2011] EWCA Civ 786
December 2011 #115The appellant trustees sought permission to appeal from a costs order. An application had been issued in December 2006 pursuant to which the trustees sought sanction to pursue claims for (inter alia) breach of trust. Three related beneficiaries (Lorna, Fiona and Marcus) resisted the application as defendants, save in respect of a negligence claim against solicitors. In July 2008, Lindsay J declined to sanction any of the claims (save for the negligence claim) and made clear that the trustees had acted in an inappropriately partisan way. Directions were given for a costs hearing,...