Hatton v HMRC [2010] UKUT 195 (LC)
January/February 2017 #166The appellant appealed against a determination by HMRC under s221 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 that the value of a freehold interest held by the deceased in a property was £475,000 on the date of death. The appellant (the executor of the deceased’s will) contended that the value was £400,000. The appellant relied on the principal of an estate agents and valuer who based his valuation on his local knowledge of property in the area, his 25 years’ experience and two comparables. HMRC relied upon the evidence of a senior valuer attached to the Valuation Office Agency who based...
Jump & anr v Lister & anr [2016] EWHC 2160 (Ch)
January/February 2017 #166John Raymond Winson and Mable Winson (Mr & Mrs Winson) made ‘mirror image’ wills with the first defendant, a solicitor employed by the second defendant, on 17 August 2010 by which, in simple terms (and subject to two minor specific legacies by Mrs Winson), they left their estate to each other but, if that gift failed, left pecuniary legacies to the same named individuals and charities with the net residue passing to the claimants in equal shares. In each will there was a survivorship clause in the following terms:
‘My estate is to be divided as if any person ...
Khouj v Acropolis Capital Partners Limited & anr [2016] EWHC 2120 (Comm)
January/February 2017 #166The claimant was the administrator of the estate of Mr Mansouri who died in 2010. He sought declarations that the two defendant companies, ACP and ACM, were the agents and fiduciaries of the deceased and that they were therefore under a duty to provide him with records in relation to transactions or other business conducted on behalf of the deceased. The deceased had been a wealthy man during his lifetime and the claimant sought to understand what had happened to his wealth.
Held: 1) The relationship between principal and agent can only be established by the consent of the principal...Lloyds Trust Company v Fragoso & ors [2013] JRC 211
January/February 2017 #166The representor was the trustee (T) of a Jersey law governed discretionary trust (R) established in 1999 and valued at £402,000. The first respondent was the settlor (S). The class of beneficiaries included S’s wife and three children.
When R was established, S described himself as a civil engineer and informed T that the funds settled were proceeds of engineering consultancy contracts which he had worked on over the last 20 years. He did not disclose that he held public office in Mozambique.
In 2010, T discovered that a company had been convicted in England of paying bribe...
Richards v Worcestershire County Council & anr [2016] EWHC 1954 (Ch)
January/February 2017 #166The 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 claimant was discharged from hospital on 21 O...
Sidney and North v British Columbia 2016 BCSC 589
January/February 2017 #166The petitioner, a non-profit society, became the trustee (T) of a charitable purpose trust of land and premises. T sought construction and amendment of the trust deed.
The trust deed provided, inter alia, that a certain portion of the land in the trust known as the Cenotaph Area be held in trust as a site solely for the purposes of a memorial cairn for Canadian soldiers killed in World War I. If any part of the lands in the trust were expropriated, the trustee was to use any expropriation proceeds to purchase other land and hold the balance of the proceeds in trust for the mainten...
Watt v ABC [2016] EWHC 2532 (COP)
January/February 2017 #166This was an application to the Court of Protection concerning whether substantial damages awarded to ABC in a personal injury claim should be paid to and administered by ABC’s property and affairs deputy or should be held on revocable trust.
In prior litigation it had been common ground that ABC lacked litigation capacity but his capacity or the extent of his capacity to manage his financial affairs with appropriate support had been in dispute. This dispute was not decided due to the matter being settled. Subsequently a deputy was appointed by the Court of Protection upon th...
Easingwood v Cockroft & ors 2013 BCCA 182
December 2016 #165Reginald Easingwood (Reginald) was married to Kathleen Easingwood (Kathleen) from 1983. He had four children by his first wife, who had died in 1976. In April 2001, Reginald executed an enduring power of attorney in favour of his two children acting together. Three years later, in March 2004, Reginald made a will. Under that will, Kathleen was to have an entitlement to income in a fund of $525,000 (plus adjustment for each year), which upon her death would be divided between his children, his step children, and his grandchildren. He also gave his wife a life interest in the matrimonial h...
Hamilton v Hamilton & anr [2016] EWHC 1132 (Ch)
December 2016 #165David Hamilton (David) died 10 February 2007. His last will dated 6 March 2006 (the will) named the first and second defendants (his solicitor and daughter respectively) as his executors and trustees. Under the terms of the will, subject to various legacies he left the residue of his estate (defined as ‘all my property of every kind, wherever situate’) to be held upon trusts for the primary benefit of his children Alan and Carolyn in equal shares. Under the trusts applicable to each share, Alan and Carolyn had a life interest in income, with remainder to their respective chil...
Re The Hanover Trust [2013] SC (Bda) 38 Civ
December 2016 #165A trustee (T) of Bermudian trusts applied to the Bermudian court by an originating summons for directions. The originating summons named the settlor and principal beneficiaries as defendants. The application invoked the Bermudian court’s supervisory jurisdiction over Bermudian trusts.
The issue arose as to whether T needed leave to serve the originating summons on four overseas resident defendants.
Held: 1) Leave for service of an originating summons out of the jurisdiction is not required for non-contentious applications by Bermudian trustees for directions relating to the a...