The claimant at first instance was the widow of the deceased and the personal representative of his estate. The defendants were the deceased’s brother and sister-in-law. The claimant sought declaratory relief, an order for sale and compensation flowing from the defendants’ alleged breach of trust in dealing with land. The defendants defended the claim on the basis of a lack of standing as the claim form had been issued before the foreign grant of probate was resealed in the UK. The defendants appealed the refusal to grant them summary judgment or strike out on this basis.
Continue reading "Strike out: Unfinished business"
The claimant sustained head injuries in a traffic accident in 1984. By 2004, he had been detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 (the 1983 Act), and while in hospital, his responsible medical officer under s34 of the 1983 Act completed a supervision application under s25A in respect of him. This explained that after-care under supervision was necessary for the claimant. It provided for the claimant’s attendance at an outpatient clinic, and cooperation with a care plan, but did not include the details of after-care services.
The ...
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...
Continue reading "Strike Out: Early doors"
B had been involved in litigation against A and the AP family (the litigation) from which he potentially stood to recover large sums of money. The claimant, G, was B’s long-term partner. In March 2012 the litigation deed was drawn up to reflect agreement between B and G regarding G’s entitlement to B’s assets (including the litigation). B subsequently lost his case against A and entered into settlement discussions with the AP family. The litigation agreement was a further document signed in September 2012 to reflect an agreement between B and G concerning her entitlement to any sums from...
This was the hearing of an application for strike out of a Part 20 claim or alternatively summary judgment in favour of the defendants where the underlying proceedings related to two separate trusts: a settlement of land and other assets created on 18 February 1967 by Charles (the settlement) and a will dated 15 March 1998 of Charles’s son, John, who died on 20 December 2004 (the will fund).
The claimant in the underlying proceedings had sought declaratory relief regarding the construction of a March 2007 deed, alternatively rectification of it, whereby the trustees of the will fu...
The defendants applied for an order summarily terminating the claimant’s application for an order under s10 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the Act) without trial.
J was a well-known, successful property dealer who died on 28 October 2012 worth a large fortune. The claimant (C) was his widow and had married J in 1997 following ten years’ cohabitation. They lived a high lifestyle. J had been married previously and had nine children; two children with C, four children from a previous marriage (D1, D2, D3 and D...
Mr J G Taylor was appointed as the executor of his father’s estate. HMRC wrote to Mr Taylor and asked him whether he wished to complete a full return or complete a form R27 to deal with his father’s final tax affairs. Mr Taylor chose to complete a form R27 and returned this. Correspondence between the parties ensued and three calculations were issued. Each was headed as a ‘calculation’. Mr Taylor was unhappy with the final calculation and appealed to the tribunal.
HMRC submitted that there was no appealable decision as the figures were calculations not for...
Mrs Clarke was the daughter of Mrs Meadus and Mr R Meadus, who owned a property known as Bonavista as joint tenants. Mr Meadus died in March 1995. Mrs Clarke alleged that prior to his death Mr Meadus expressed that he wanted Bonavista to remain in the family after he and his wife were dead. They wanted Mrs Clarke to live with Mrs Meadus, at Bonavista, for the remainder of her life and she would have Bonavista on Mrs Meadus’s death. Mrs Meadus asked Mrs Clarke and her husband to move in, which they did in September 1995, after allegedly receiving repeated promises that Mrs Meadus would le...