Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

A preliminary ruling by the ECJ has found a UK exit tax to be a restriction on the freedom of establishment. Christopher Salomons explains

On 21 December 2016 Advocate General Kokott issued an Opinion regarding the compatibility of s80 TCGA 1992 with the fundamental freedoms under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in the case of The Trustees of the P Panayi Accumulation & Maintenance Settlements v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2015]. The First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) had requested a preliminary ruling.

Thomas Klemme and Oliver Auld highlight a clash of trust law concerning trusts over foreign assets, which also has lessons for liquidators

The recent Supreme Court judgment in the case of Akers v Samba Financial Group [2017] (Akers v Samba) has been notable for trust practitioners largely due to the complex conflicts of trust law issues which were raised between the parties. In particular, the judgment provides helpful commentary on the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition (the Trusts Convention) and certain English law principles concerning trusts of foreign assets and transactions over trust property. However, it is perhaps insolvency practitioners who will be most interested in the Supreme Court’s ruling in this case, which confirmed that the power of the English court under s127 of the Insolvency Act 1986 to declare a disposition of property belonging to a company after it has been placed in liquidation to be void did not apply to the sale of property, which was held for the company on trust.

James Lister evaluates whether the Court of Appeal has established a new approach to disclosure and data protection

In February 2017, the Court of Appeal handed down their judgment in Dawson-Damer & Ors v Taylor Wessing LLP [2017]. In the few weeks since then, much has already been written about the judgment and its impact on trust law and data protection issues alike: does the court’s judgment herald a new approach to well-enshrined principles of disclosure and data use?

Emma Loveday provides some specific examples of the effects of recent reforms to taxation on non-UK domiciled trusts

In the March 2017 edition of Trusts and Estates Law & Tax Journal, I wrote an article entitled ‘Where are we now?’ providing an update on the various government consultations affecting private client practitioners. The consultations included those relating to the reforms to the taxation of non-domiciliaries (non-doms) which came into force on 6 April 2017. In this addendum to the article, I explain in further detail how these non-dom reforms will affect a standard offshore trust structure by looking at two different scenarios before and after 6 April 2017. Since writing the original article, the government has published amendments to the non-dom reforms in Finance Bill 2017, and this addendum incorporates those changes.

Paul Davies reviews the latest edition of a trusted classic

The latest edition of Drafting Trusts and Will Trusts – a Modern Approach (13th ed) has recently been published and, having accepted the invitation to review this well-known publication I realised I would actually have to read it – not just skim it but read it properly (or most of the chapters at any rate). Although I am familiar with earlier editions of this book I have never read it from cover to cover and I don’t suppose very many people have; after all, I am sure most people would regard the book mainly as a reference book rather than a riveting page turner. That is a pity because having found the time to read it I realise what an educational experience it has been. Furthermore, because it is more readable than most technical publications, reading it did not feel like a great chore. I am not going to try to convince you that this is a book you would want to take away on holiday, but if you did I do not think you would regret it.

Hannah Gearey outlines the points considered when there is a conflict between the authority of the deputy and trustees in the case of a personal injury trust

The question that arose in the case of Watt v ABC [2017] highlights the conflict that can arise between the authority of a deputy appointed by the Court of Protection, and the trustees of a personal injury trust.

Despite the lack of news for private client practitioners in the Budget, Geoffrey Shindler advises caution

Last month we had a Budget that did not bite at a headline level, but we do have to watch the small print very carefully.

David Rees QC, Eliza Eagling, Bryony Cove and Adam Carvalho discuss a key pensions case which resulted in a taxpayer victory

The case of HMRC v Parry [2017] related to two decisions made by Mrs Rachel Staveley in relation to her pension fund shortly before her death in December 2006. In November 2006 Mrs Staveley transferred her funds from one registered pension scheme (the s32 scheme) into another (the AXA PPP). At the time of the transfer, Mrs Staveley wrongly believed that if she left her pension in the s32 scheme, there was a risk any surplus on the fund would revert to her ex-husband on her death. The second decision made by Mrs Staveley was that she omitted to take any lifetime benefits from the AXA PPP.