High Commissioner for Pakistan in the United Kingdom v Prince Mukkaram Jah, His Exalted Highness the 8th Nizam of Hyderabad [2016] EWHC 1465 (Ch)

December 2016 #165

The underlying claim concerned monies deposited in a new bank account with the National Westminster Bank (the bank) in the name of Mr Rahimtoola, the High Commissioner for Pakistan in London between 16 and 20 September 1948 (the Fund). The monies deposited had belonged to the state of Hyderabad/the 7th Nizam (Hyderabad’s absolute monarch at the time). The state of Hyderabad had been annexed to India between 13 and 18 September 2016. The underlying claim had been brought by Pakistan against the bank. A number of other defendants claiming an interest in the fund had been joined. Consequent...

Davidson v Seelig [2016] EWHC 549 (Ch)

May 2016 #159

Two settlements known as the Manny and Brigitta Davidson settlements were established by Manny and Brigitta Davidson in 1967 upon broad discretionary trusts, with UK resident trustees. Manny and Brigitta had two children, Maxine and Gerald, born in 1958 and 1961 respectively. The settlements were in identical terms. There was an 80 year perpetuity period, and the appointed day was defined as three days before its expire. The specified class of discretionary beneficiaries included the settlors’ children and remoter issue, their spouses and other family members. Their combined value ...

R v Hursthouse 2013 EWCA (Crim) 517

June 2013 #130

On 28 October 2009 Susan Hursthouse (the appellant) pleaded guilty to an offence of fraud contrary to s1 of the Fraud Act 2006. The offence involved the forgery of the will of Henry Swinscoe (the testator). The appellant was accused along with her mother Jean Oldknow, who had previously been married to the testator. The testator died on 1 July 2008. He left a professionally drawn will dated 13 May 2004 by which he left everything to his then wife, Netta, or, in the event of her predeceasing him, which she did, his estate to be divided equally between the appellant and h...

D R Sheridan LLP v Higgins & anr [2012] EWHC 547 (Ch)

June 2012 #120

C left a will appointing her son and daughter as executors and benefiting her family. Initially, both the son and the daughter instructed a solicitor, D. There was a dispute as to £200,000 which had been transferred out of the estate (although it was not clear when) by the daughter. D suggested that the daughter obtain independent advice, which she did. D was then only instructed by the son. The son brought proceedings for an interim injunction preserving the £200,000, which were compromised but the ultimate issue of ownership not finally resolved. There was a breakdown in relations betw...

Kostic v Chaplin WTLR(w) 2008-01

Web Only