Rangers [2017] UKSC 45

Autumn 2017 #169

The appeal concerned a tax avoidance scheme by which employers paid remuneration to their employees through an employees’ remuneration trust in the hope that the scheme would avoid liability to income tax and Class 1 national insurance contributions. The question on appeal was whether an employee’s remuneration was taxable as their emoluments or earnings when it was paid to a third party in circumstances in which the employee had no prior entitlement to receive it himself or herself.

The employing companies, including RFC, operated the tax avoidance scheme in the tax years between...

Routier v HMRC [2017] EWCA Civ 1584

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...

The Public Guardian’s Severance Applications [2017] EWCOP 10

Autumn 2017 #169

The Public Guardian brought various consolidated applications for severance under para 11((3) of Schedule 1 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (the MCA 2005) in respect of various lasting powers of attorney which were potentially unlawful or ineffective by reason of the operation of s9 MCA 2005, which provides that an LPA is not created unless it is made and registered in accordance with Schedule 1 of para 19.

Held:

  1. 1) As to MC, the donor at s7 of the LPA had instructed that ‘Any financial decisions up to the value of £150.00 c...

A & ors v D & ors [2017] EWHC 2222 (Ch)

Autumn 2017 #169

A & B were the current trustees of a settlement known as the Children’s Trust dated 21 March 2000. They were, with C, the current trustees of a settlement known as the M Trust dated 7 December 2004 (together the ‘Settlements’). A was the settlor of the settlements. D, E & F were his three minor children. G was joined in as a person appointed to represent a class of unborn beneficiaries. The settlements were drafted to qualify as accumulation and maintenance trusts within the requirements of Section 71 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (‘1984 Act’). Both made provision for a class o...

Vigne v HMRC TC/2016/05196

Autumn 2017 #169

The deceased died on 29 May 2012. At the time she was the sole beneficial owner of 30 acres of land (the land) used for carrying out a livery business. The business provided less than ‘part livery’ (ie day-to-day care being shared between the livery operator and horse owner) but more than ‘DIY Livery’ (ie a right to reside in a field plus a stable). For example the business provided worming products for the horses and hay feed during winter months.

The deceased’s personal representatives claimed BPR on the ground that the land was ‘relevant busi...

AAZ v BBZ [2016] EWHC 3234 (Fam)

Autumn 2017 #169

AAZ (W) applied for financial orders ancillary to her divorce from BBZ (H). H was the sole director of the second respondent C Ltd, a Cypriot registered company and the trustee of a Bermudian Discretionary Trust (the trust). P Ltd, the third respondent, is a Panamian company which H said was within the trust. P Ltd was said to hold the bulk of the wealth in the case. None of the respondents took any part in the trial. H was in breach of several court orders, including one compelling his personal attendance for the duration of the trial.

H and W had been married since 1993 when the...

ADS v DSM & ors [2017] EWCOP 8

Autumn 2017 #169

JKS and her late husband had two sons, ADS and DSM. She brought proceedings against the former in August 2012 seeking relief in respect of (a) a transfer by her late husband to ADS of his parents’ matrimonial home (at which she and her late husband continued to live) and (b) a transfer by her late husband to ADS and his wife of a piece of land adjoining other property. Serious allegations were made by JKS, including allegations of undue influence by ADS. On the death of JKS’s husband a significant sum of inheritance tax was due in respect of the reservation of benefit in the matrimonial ...

Badenach v Calvert [2016] HCA 18

Autumn 2017 #169

The first appellant was a legal practitioner and a partner of the second appellant, a law firm. The solicitor received instructions from Jeffrey Doddridge (who was 77 years old at the time) to prepare his will, by which the entirety of his estate was to pass to the respondent, Roger Calvert, whom Mr Doddridge treated as his son. Mr Doddridge made no provision for his daughter by his first marriage. She brought a claim under the Testator’s Family Maintenance Act 1912 (Tas) (the TFM Act), and was successful in obtaining a court order that provision be made out of the clients estate. ...

Ball v Ball [2017] 1 EWHC 1750 (Ch)

Autumn 2017 #169

The Deceased was married to James Ball. They had had eleven children, including the three claimants and eight of the nine defendants. In or around 1991, the family split, when the three claimants reported their father to the police for sexually abusing them when they were younger. The Deceased felt that the complaints were exaggerated, and was annoyed that they had been made public. As a result, on 27 May 1992 the Deceased made a will excluding those three claimants from benefit, dividing her estate between her eight remaining children and one of her grandsons. The will was professional ...

Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Limited & anor v HMRC [2017] EWCA Civ 1512

Autumn 2017 #169

This appeal concerned the first periodic charge which fell due on a Jersey-resident discretionary trust established by the settlor, Mr Dreelan (‘the Settlor’) on 21 June 2001 (‘the 2001 Settlement’).

The Settlor transferred £100 to Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Limited (‘the Trustee’) to hold on trusts in broad discretionary form. The beneficiaries were the Settlor, his spouse and his children then living or born during the trust period. At this date the Settlor was not domiciled in the UK for IHT purposes.

The Trustee lent part of the settled funds to a wholly-owned Je...