Partington v Rossiter [2022] WTLR 257

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2022 #186

The deceased was domiciled in Russia and entitled to assets in Jersey. He made a will in the UK in 2013. He had initially prepared a draft himself, which defined his estate as his property, money and investments in the UK, and made specific legacies to his children in respect of his Jersey assets. The deceased’s solicitor advised him that the will did not need to refer to specific assets and it was redrafted. Clause 1 of the executed will stated ‘I confirm that this will only has effect in relation to my UK assets’. It divided the residuary estate equally between his children. The deceas...

Routier & anr v HMRC [2020] WTLR 281

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2020 #178

C died in 2007 in Jersey, leaving her residuary estate on trust (the trust) for purposes that were agreed to have been exclusively charitable under English law. C directed in her will that the proper law of the trust was the law of Jersey. The appellants, who were domiciled in Jersey, were appointed to be C’s executors and the trustees of the trust. C’s estate included assets in the United Kingdom amounting to £1.7m. In 2010 the appellants retired as trustees (but not as executors) and were replaced by a UK resident trustee. C’s will was then amended so as to make the proper law of the T...

A & ors v K & ors [2019] WTLR 335

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2019 #175

Introduction

W, who died some years ago, established several settlements (referred to generally as ‘the General Family Trusts’), either directly or by trustees to whom he had provided funds. The value of the General Family Trusts was very substantial indeed. W had been married several times and had a large family. A representation was issued in respect of two of the General Family Trusts: the Y Trust and the Z Trust. The trustee companies of both of the trusts were amongst the respondents.

It had been W’s wish that after his death, in the administration of ...

Investec & anr v Glenalla & ors [2019] WTLR 95

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2019 #174

The Background

The Privy Council heard eight appeals arising from the management of the Tchenguiz Discretionary Trust (“TDT”) between March 2007 and October 2008.

The TDT is a discretionary trust governed by the law of Jersey; in the period in question it had two trustees which were governed by Guernsey law: Investec Trust (Guernsey) Limited (“Investec”) and Bayeux Trustees Limited (collectively “the Trustees”). In July 2010 the Trustees were replaced as trustees of the TDT by Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees SA (“R&H”), a company incorporated in Switzer...

Routier & anr v HMRC [2017] WTLR 1119

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2017 #169

The appeal concerned the restriction (the Restriction) imposed by s23 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA), as interpreted by the Court of Appeal in an earlier hearing of the appeal, on IHT relief for legacies and gifts to charities, to legacies and gifts to UK charities subject to the supervision of the UK courts. The question was whether the Restriction violated the EU law principle of freedom of movement of capital so as not to be enforceable in relation to a legacy of an estate with assets situate in the UK to a Jersey charity.

There were three sub-issues:

  1. (1) W...

Jersey: Independent process

Julie Melia outlines the procedure for will-making and probate in Jersey, and the consequences where it is not followed ‘While a will drawn anywhere is the world may, provided that it complies with the requirements of the jurisdiction of the deceased’s domicile, be accepted for Jersey probate purposes, a will dealing with immovable property must …
This post is only available to members.

Re the Onorati Settlement [2013] JRC 182

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | December 2015 #155

This was an application by two beneficiaries of the Onorati Settlement, a Jersey discretionary trust (the trust), to set aside a deed of appointment distributing the trust fund to them. The application was made under the so-called principle in Hastings-Bass on the basis that the trustee had failed to take into account considerations which they ought to have taken into account when exercising their discretion, namely the UK tax consequences of making the appointment. Their application was on the basis that the Respondent (the trustee) had failed to take adequate tax advice.

<...

Jersey: Reducing exposure

Robert Gardner looks at how Jersey trustees should avoid a breach of duty when faced with the risk of tax liabilities, with reference to the Onorati Settlement ‘Trustees should, as a minimum, ensure tax advice is received (and reviewed by the trustee) when transactions with possible tax exposures are entered.’ Jersey trustees have received little …
This post is only available to members.

Dominion Corporate Trustees Ltd & anr v Capmark Bank Europe plc [2010] EWHC 1605 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | December 2011 #115

The 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 ...