HSBC v Tan Poh Lee & ors [2020] WTLR 493

The plaintiff trustee applied for Beddoe relief authorising it to defend proceedings brought by one of the secondary beneficiaries of the trust in the Singapore High Court to terminate the trust. It sought permission to defend both on the substance and to challenge the Singapore court’s jurisdiction on the ground of forum non conveniens, since the trust was governed by Cayman law and the Cayman Islands was the forum for administration of the trust. The Singapore proceedings alleged that refusal to comply with the plaintiff beneficiary’s demands for distribution constituted a breach of tr...

Re H [2020] WTLR 479

The claimant daughter brought a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 for provision out of the estate of her late father. The sole beneficiary of his estate was his widow, who was in residential care with severe health concerns, but who had been debarred from defending the proceedings by reason of non-compliance with earlier court orders. The claimant had been estranged from her parents since 2010 and had a number of health difficulties which made her unable to work. She lived in rented accommodation with two children, whose father visited them daily ...

Goss-Custard & anr v Templeman & ors [2020] WTLR 441

Lord Templeman, who was a former member of the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords, was the father of the second and third defendants and the father-in-law of the first defendant. In 1996 he was remarried to a distant cousin, Sheila Edworthy, and moved home to live with her in a property called Mellowstone, Exeter, which she had inherited from her second husband, John Edworthy. Following his second marriage, Lord Templeman became very much part of his wife’s family and developed close bonds with her step-daughters, the claimants. On 3 December 2004 Lord Templeman and his wife made c...

GAAR Opinion notice [2020] WTLR 427

By a referral dated 28 October 2019 HMRC referred to the GAAR Advisory Panel arrangements made by B as executor of the estate of his late mother, A, who died in April 2015. Four months before her death A incorporated a company, funded by £700,000 of share capital. The company established a discretionary trust, to which A gifted most of the share capital in the company. The beneficial class of the trust was current and former employees, and their descendants. The only employees of the company were A, B and B’s wife.

B claimed that the gift of shares to the trust was an exempt trans...

Amos v Mancini [2020] WTLR 417

The deceased was married to the claimant. In 2019, when he was 81 and she was 74, a car they were driving in was involved in a road accident. The deceased died of his injuries. The claimant was driving, and was prosecuted for causing the deceased’s death by careless driving. She pleaded guilty, was given a suspended prison sentence and was disqualified from driving for 12 months.

The deceased’s will left his residuary estate to the claimant. In the event that the claimant predeceased the deceased, the will provided for legacies to the defendants. The deceased was also joint tenant...

Ali v Taj [2020] WTLR 391

The respondents were the residuary beneficiaries of the estate of Mohammed Taj; the appellant was the deceased’s younger brother and one of his two executors. The deceased died on 1 September 2007, and probate was granted on 7 May 2008 to the appellant and his co-executor. Various issues arose in the course of administering the estate, and in the eleven years following the grant the executors had not provided an inventory of the estate’s assets nor an account of their administration.

The respondents issued a summons for the executors to exhibit on oath an inventory and account of ...

A v B & ors [2020] WTLR 385

The plaintiff trustees of a discretionary trust governed by Cayman law sought a declaration concerning the power of variation conferred by the trust instrument, and which was in the following terms:

‘The Trustees may, with the consent of the Settlor during his lifetime, at any time and from time to time by instrument in writing vary, add to, revise or modify, the terms and conditions of this Settlement except that no such amendment may be made which either changes any Beneficiary hereunder or alters that [sic] terms of clause (I) of subsection 3.4 of this Settlement.’

The s...

Watson v Kea Investments Ltd [2020] WTLR 351

In 2012, the claimant trustee (K) invested £129m into a joint venture (Spartan), which was alleged have been procured by the deceit of Mr Watson. The action between K and Spartan was settled, with certain agreements between Spartan and K set aside. As a result, K was entitled to treat Spartan as constructive trustee of £129m, which also gave rise to a right to interest under the equitable jurisdiction of the Court, or s35A Senior Courts Act 1981. K continued its claim against Mr Watson, who was found liable to pay equitable compensation to K of all sums which were due from Spartan, but w...

Todd v Parsons & ors [2020] WTLR 305

T died in 2009, aged 96 years, leaving two adult children, her son, who was the claimant (C), and her daughter, who was the third defendant (D3). By a will document dated 25 September 2008, T appointed the first defendant (D1) and the second defendant (D2) as her executors. D1 was the daughter of D3 and T’s only grandchild. D2 was the solicitor who drafted the will document. Both remained neutral in the proceedings.

In June 2017, C brought a claim for probate in solemn form of the will document and for an order removing D1 and D2 as executors and appointing an independent personal...

Routier & anr v HMRC [2020] WTLR 281

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...

Rossendale Borough Council v Hurstwood Properties & ors [2020] WTLR 253

Two schemes to avoid the payment of National Non-domestic Rates (NDR), by granting a short lease of unoccupied properties to special purpose vehicle companies (SPVs), which were then allowed to be dissolved, either by voluntary winding up or as dormant companies. Under the NDR legislation, the liability to pay rates on unoccupied property fell on the ‘owner’, being the person entitled to possession, which would include a lessee. However, properties owned by a company being wound up voluntarily were excluded under the applicable Regulations from being subject to NDR at all.

The cla...

Price v Saundry & anr [2020] WTLR 233

By Declaration of Trust dated 6 July 2009 made between the Appellant and the First Respondent’s husband the latter declared that he held the properties set out in the schedule and the net proceeds of sale and the net income until sale upon trust for the parties thereto as tenants in common in equal shares. The First Respondent became a trustee as a result of being her husband’s sole personal representative. Subsequently she appointed her brother as an additional trustee and, after his death, his executrix was substituted as a party. The Appellant brought a claim seeking an order removing...

Perry & anr v Neupert & ors (costs) [2020] WTLR 221

The claimants were the widow and the daughter of the deceased who died on 8 March 2015. The deceased executed an English will (“the Will”) dealing with his UK assets and appointing a Swiss lawyer (the 1st defendant) as his executor and trustee. The widow (the 1st claimant) was the sole beneficiary of the English estate. There was a breakdown of relations between the 1st claimant and the 1st defendant. The daughter (the 2nd claimant) supported the widow. The claimants applied for an order under s50 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 removing the 1st defendant as executor and for th...

Lomax v Lomax [2020] WTLR 191

The claimant made an application under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 as a widow of the deceased. She wanted the parties to engage in Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE), but the defendant refused to do so. The claimant asked the court to order an ENE under CPR r3.1(2)(m).

At first instance, Parker J made it clear that she believed that an ENE would be of benefit to the parties, but declined to order this. The claimant appealed against the decision not to order an ENE.

The single issue on appeal was whether a court can order an ENE in circumstance...

Hendry v Hendry & ors [2020] WTLR 175

The claimant, who was born in the Philippines, married Michael Frederick Hendry (the deceased) on 31 October 2003. He was 20 years older and already had three adult children. They entered into a pre-nuptial agreement which provided that in the event of the marriage failing the claimant would receive a lump sum of £10,000 and a one-way flight to the Philippines. In the event, they separated on 24 June 2016. The deceased made a will on 6 August 2016 dividing his residuary estate equally between the first and second defendants and appointing the third defendant as executor. The claimant pet...

Re H Trust; Butterfield Trust (Bermuda) Ltd v P & ors [2020] WTLR 167

1) On the wording of the trust deed, the protectors of the trust had to act jointly. The unilateral designation of the first successor protector was therefore invalid, as was his purported designation of P as his successor protector.

2) Since the powers of the protector under the trust deed – the power to remove and appoint trustees, power to move the situs of the trust and authority to require and approve accounts – were fiduciary, and since the personal characteristics of the individual originally appointed by the trust deed were not essential to the exercise of the power,...

Foster v HMRC [2020] WTLR 145

Susan Elizabeth Foster (“Deceased”) owned 6.39 acres of agricultural land at Wolverhampton Road, Shifnal, Shropshire (“Site”). In March 2004 she entered into a joint venture agreement (“JVA”) with a developer who already owned adjoining land known as the Uplands just outside the defined development boundary of Shifnal. The site, which was located outside the boundary as defined in the local plan proposals map, was shown as “safeguarded land” (i.e. land removed from the green belt and identified as having the potential to meet future development needs beyond the plan period). The Deceased...

Estera & anr v Singh & ors [2020] WTLR 127

The Petitioners brought an unfair prejudice petition against the First Respondent in respect of their management of the Fourth Respondent (the Company). Following a liability trial, the First Respondents and the Company were ordered to purchase the Petitioners’ shares in the Company at a price to be determined. A quantum trial followed in which the purchase price was determined and an initial sum to be paid on account of the full price within 28 days, with the balance to be paid within 6 months. The wording of the order was left to the parties.

A purchase from the First Petitioner...

Charnley & anr v HMRC [2020] WTLR 93

Mr Gill’s estate included the house in which he lived, a brick barn and outbuildings and 21 acres of permanent pasture. During the relevant period Mr Gill did not own any livestock. He allowed farmers to graze their livestock on his agricultural land under annual grazing licences. It was not disputed that the house was of a character appropriate to the farm.

HMRC refused agricultural property relief (‘APR’) in respect of the value of the house, barn and outbuildings on the basis that neither the house nor outbuildings were occupied for the purposes of agriculture, and refused the ...

Barnaby & anr v Johnson [2020] WTLR 67

Mrs Maudlin Bascoe (T) died on 29 August 2015. Cs sought to prove a will dated 27 April 2005 (the 2005 will) naming them as executors. C1 was T’s son. C2 was T’s former solicitor and the draftsman of her wills from 1988 2005. D was T’s daughter. T also had two other children – a son, G, (who pre-deceased her) and a daughter, B (who died after T in 2017).

Under the 2005 will, D received a legacy of £100. There was an earlier will dated 25 October 1992 (the 1992 will) leaving D a legacy of £10,000 the validity of which D did not dispute at trial.

D challenged the 2005 will, a...