Bowser v Smith & anr [2023] WTLR 1207

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2023 #193

The appellant solicitor applied under s50 Administration of Justice Act 1985 to remove his co-executor, the deceased’s widow. At a hearing before Bacon J the parties agreed by consent that both executors should be removed and replaced with an independent administrator, but could not agree on costs. The judge gave directions for written submissions to be exchanged, after which a decision was made on the papers without a hearing. The appellant was ordered to pay personally the respondent’s costs on the standard basis (with the balance paid out of the estate) and was deprived of hi...

Schumacher v Clarke & ors [2021] WTLR 361

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2021 #182

The claimant and the first to third defendants were the executors and trustees of the estate of Dame Zaha Hadid deceased, who died in 2016. The claimant and the first to third defendants had had great difficulty working together in the administration of the deceased’s estate. The claimant brought proceedings under s50 of the Administration of Estates Act 1985 for the removal of the first to third defendants and they counterclaimed seeking equivalent relief against him. By the time of the hearing an agreement had been reached between the claimant and defendant trustees. ...

In the matter of Various Lasting Powers of Attorney [2019] WTLR 1443

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2019 #177

In 15 separate applications under s23(1) Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), the Public Guardian (PG) asked the court to determine the effect of language used in lasting powers of attorney which he was asked to register. Some were withdrawn, leaving 11. The common theme was that each instrument expressed an intention that the attorney use the donor ‘s assets to benefit someone other than the donor.

PS: Under the heading ‘Preferences ‘, the donor entered the words ‘The needs of [LS] before anyone else ‘. Under the heading ‘Instructions ‘, she entered the words ...

University of London v Prag & anr [2014] EWHC 3564 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | May 2015 #149

This decision concerned the construction of a trust deed dated 28 November 1944 (the deed) made between Eric Max Warburg on behalf of the Warburg family, Viscount Lee of Fareham on behalf of the Warburg Society, and the University of London (UOL). There arose questions about the scope of the deed, the ownership of property, the status of funding and the propriety of the administration by UOL under the deed. UOL brought a construction summons to determine these questions at the behest of HM Attorney General (the second defendant). The first defendant was Professor John Prag, of the Univer...