Brazil v Durant [2015] UKPC 35

October 2015 # 153

The effective plaintiff was the municipality of Sao Paulo (the municipality). The Federal Republic of Brazil was nominally the plaintiff because its constitution required it to be a party to any action brought outside Brazil by a Brazilian public authority. The defendants were companies registered in the British Virgin Islands (the companies) which were, at the relevant time, under the practical control of Mr Paulo Maluf and/or his son Mr Flavio Maluf. From 1993 Mr Paulo Maluf had been mayor of the municipality.

The case concerned payments made to Mr Paulo Maluf, or others on his ...

Curtis Green v HMRC [2015] UKFTT 0236 (TC)

October 2015 # 153

Mrs Green ran a business known as Flagstaff Holidays (the business) which let five units of self-contained holiday accommodation in a property known as Flagstaff House, Burnham Overy Staithe, King’s Lynn, Norfolk (the property). Mrs Green had bought the property for £900,000 in 2003. Between 2009-2012, the property was let for a total of around 650 to 750 nights a year. At all relevant times, Mrs Green lived in Woodbridge, Suffolk. On 2 February 2010, the property was valued by a firm of estate agents at £1.9m on a vacant possession basis.

On 5 April 2010, Mrs Green settled ...

Hutchings v HMRC [2015] UKFTT 0009 (TC) On appeal from: TC/2013/00644

October 2015 # 153

Robert James Hutchings (‘deceased’) owned a farm in West Sussex, from which he operated a number of businesses, valued at his death at about £3m. He had an offshore bank account with Julius Bär in Switzerland and, approximately six months before his death, authorised a transfer of the balance to the appellant. The sum transferred was £443,669.00. The appellant was also principal beneficiary under the will of the deceased, who died on 14 October 2009. The executors, who were a solicitor and a land agent, met with members of the family on 29 October 2009 during the course of wh...

Ilott v Mitson [2015] EWCA Civ 797

October 2015 # 153

The appeal concerned the quantification of an award for maintenance pursuant to the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the 1975 Act). Section 1 of the 1975 Act confers the right on, among others, a child of the deceased to apply for an order if the will of the deceased or the intestacy rules did not make reasonable provision for that person. The provision was limited to awards of maintenance.

The appellant, who was an adult, was the only child of the deceased and was raised by the deceased, her father having died about t...

MF Global UK [2014] EWHC 2222 (Ch)

October 2015 # 153

MFGUK was part of the MF Global group which carried on business as broker-dealers in financial markets throughout the world. The group’s principal operations in London were carried on by MFGUK. It and other companies in the group entered insolvency proceedings in the United States and England on 31 October 2011. Administrators were appointed under the Investment Bank Special Administration Regulations 2011. MFGUM held funds in two different capacities – money for clients as trustee of the client money trust, and money beneficially on its own account. On their app...

Public Guardian v CT & EY [2014] EWCOP 51

October 2015 # 153

CT was born in 1929. He has a wife and two children: a son and a daughter (EY).

On 19 May 2013, CT suffered a stroke, which resulted in left hemiplegia and impaired vision. He was admitted to hospital where he was diagnosed as having vascular dementia.His stroke precipitated a rift within his family, with CT and his daughter aligned on one side and his wife and son on the other.

On 18 June 2013, CT executed a lasting power of attorney (LPA) for property and affairs appointing EY as his attorney and another person as a replacement attorney and named nobody to be given notice...

Scott v HMRC [2015] UKFTT 0266 (TC)

October 2015 # 153

This appeal related to an inheritance tax notice of determination dated 22 May 2013 in respect of the estate of Dr Olive Scott (Olive) who died on 4 March 2007. Olive was predeceased by her husband Professor James Scott (James). The appellant, Malcolm Scott (Malcolm), was her surviving son and co-executor. The other executor had been Olive’s son Alistair Scott (Alistair), who died on 7 November 2009. There had been a dispute between Alistair and Malcolm as to the correct inheritance tax position in relation to certain paintings, and this had led to their filing separate IHT400 acco...

WA v The Executors of the estate [2015] EWHC 2233 (Fam)

October 2015 # 153

Having entered into a pre-nuptial agreement, WA (‘the wife’) married HA (‘the husband’) in 1997. The wife was an heiress and the husband brought modest assets of his own to the marriage. They kept their finances separate. The couple and their three children lived on a very large estate (‘the Z estate’) during the marriage and restored it using the wife’s finances.

The marriage broke down in 2014. Both the wife and husband instructed expert family lawyers which supported the brokerage of an agreement. Following disclosure of their respectiv...

Bagum v Hafiz & anr [2015] EWCA Civ 801

October 2015 # 153

The claimant and two of her sons, the first and second defendants, were trustees of a residential property in Copenhagen Street, Islington which they held on trust for themselves as tenants in common in equal shares. The parties had all contributed financially to the purchase of the property, in which they lived for some time along with the claimant’s other children. The crowded conditions led to tensions, and to the second defendant leaving the property.

The claimant issued proceedings seeking an order obliging the second defendant to sell his interest in the property to th...

Re Barclays Private Bank & Trust CHP 2014/56

October 2015 # 153

The claimant was the sole trustee of a unit trust. The trust had been terminated in 1988 and the assets released and distributed to approximately 100 unit trust holders with a final distribution having been made on the footing that four particular investments were unrealisable. Since then, sums had been received from those four investments, some of which had been distributed to unit holders and some of which (the residual amount) was payable to 71 unit holders (the residual holders) who despite significant efforts, including multiple letters (and telephone call were a telephone number wa...