Hawes v Burgess & anr [2013] WTLR 453
April 2013 #128Daphne Burgess, the deceased (D), died in May 2009 aged 80. She had three children: the appellant, Julia (J), and the respondents, Peter (P) and Libby (L). P and the deceased were very close. He organised her finances and in 2006 bought a bungalow for her to live in. It was to remain in his name, but subject to a lease to his mother to give her security. They agreed that she would pay £21,000 towards the cost of a new kitchen and bathroom that she wanted installed. J and P fell out for a number of reasons, mainly connected with the purchase of the bungalow and related arrangements affect...
HMRC v Pawson [2013] UKUT 050 (TCC)
April 2013 #128The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) appealed from the decision of the Tax Chamber of the First tier Tribunal (FTT) dated 14 December 2011 ([2012] WTLR 665) to allow an appeal against a notice of determination dated 1 October 2008. The respondents were the personal representatives of Nicolette Vivian Pawson (Mrs Pawson). The notice had determined that Mrs Pawson’s 25% interest in a property known as Fairhaven, Thorpeness, Suffolk (Fairhaven) was subject to inheritance tax on a deemed disposal at the date of her death. Fairhaven was a large bungalow o...
Iles v Iles [2012] EWHC 919 (Ch)
April 2013 #128The deceased, Mr Bob Iles (D) acquired the disputed land and other land which formed part of the Forge Industrial Estate (the Forge) in Darlington over a period of time.
In 1983 D and his wife, the defendant, Mrs Margaret Iles (W) signed a declaration of trust declaring that they held a parcel of land at the Forge in favour of the claimant, their daughter Rebecca (R) upon her attaining 21 years of age. In 1988 the council compulsorily purchased all land held by D and W at the Forge, which included this parcel of land. Following lengthy negotiations, there was an exchange of land ...
Kell v Jones & ors
April 2013 #128Mrs Joan Pittaway (the testatrix) made a will dated 15 December 2010 and died on 21 January 2011. Her will appointed Mr Kell as one of two executors.
Clause 4 of her will left pecuniary legacies to 15 named relatives and four charities (with £7500 in total left to charity). Clause 6 of the will left her residue to be paid ‘equally among such of the beneficiaries named in clause 4 as shall survive me and if more than one in equal shares’.
It was alleged that the testatrix wished her residue to be split only between family members and not the charities. The size...
Mosley v Popley [2012] EWHC 3905 (Ch)
April 2013 #128The second defendant (Mr Mosley) appealed against the judgment of Deputy Master Bartlett of 9 May 2012 dismissing his application to strike out the claim brought against him by the claimant (Mr Popley). Mr Popley’s father had caused a trust known as the Blue Ridge Trust (the trust) to be settled in St Vincent and the Grenandines. The shares in the first defendant company (Atem) were held by the third defendant corporate trustee on the terms of the trust. In 2000, Atem purchased White Owl Barn, Tenterden, Kent. Atem remained legal and beneficial owner of the property until 2011. In ...
Paynter & anr v Hinch [2013] EWHC 13 (Ch)
April 2013 #128>The defendant (Frank) obtained probate of his late mother’s will dated 26 July 2004 (Abbie and the 2004 will). The 2004 will appointed Frank sole executor of Abbie’s estate, which was bequeathed to Frank absolutely.
The claimants (Stephen and Victoria), Abbie’s other surviving children, challenged the validity of the 2004 will on the ground that their mother did not know and approve its contents. They sought revocation of the grant of probate made to Frank and a grant in solemn form of a will dated 24 January 1999 (the 1999 will), by which Abbie’s re...
U Ltd v B & ors [2011] JRC 131
April 2013 #128B had created the W Settlement (the trust) in 1989 as one of a number of settlements created for the benefit of B, his three sisters, their issue and their remoter issue. As the settlor, B and any wife of his were expressly excluded from benefit under the trust (but not from the other family settlements).
B and his wife Q had been involved in divorce proceedings before the Family Division of the High Court (the English court) for three years. It was considered that the trust’s value (some £2.5m based on publicly available information) greatly exceeded the other settlements&#...
Ramsay v HMRCC [2012] UKFTT 176 (TC)
March 2013 #127In 2004, the appellant (Mrs Ramsay) and her husband transferred a property that they owned (Moat House) into a corporate vehicle, TPQ Developments Ltd, in exchange for shares in that company.
Moat House was a large property converted into ten flats. Five were occupied at the operative time.
On her tax return for 2004/05, Mrs Ramsay claimed relief under s162 Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA) (rollover relief on the transfer to the company).
In September 2007 HMRC raised an enquiry notice.
Mrs Ramsay argued in correspondence that the numerous acti...
Shirt v Shirt [2012] EWCA Civ 1029
March 2013 #127Stanley Shirt, the claimant (C), owned the freehold of the family farm (Syda) and an agricultural tenancy (Rufford), which he lost in 2007 as a result of failure to pay the rent. He had three sons and a daughter. In 1974 C entered into a farming partnership with his wife, Marie (M), who died in 2004, and his son, Alan (A). Both farms were recorded as partnership assets. In 2006 C fell out with A and thereafter they carried on two separate businesses. A lived in a house on Rufford until the tenancy came to an end, when he moved into a caravan on Syda. C brought a claim for possession agai...
Singh & ors v Ahluwalia [2012] EWCA Civ 1635
March 2013 #127The testator, Ranjit Singh (D), died in 2009. He had executed a will dated 3 May 1999, naming his eldest son, the claimant (J), as executor and sole beneficiary. The will was attested by two witnesses, Maurice Grantham (G) and Gurdial Ahluwalia (A). D’s daughter, Balvinder Ahluwalia (B), challenged the will on the grounds that the two witnesses had signed it on two separate and distinct occasions at different places. G gave evidence that he had signed the will when D visited his house and he was the only witness present, but he was not able to identify the will when it was shown to...