Continue reading "IHT: Hoodwinked?"
This post is only available to members.
IHT: Hoodwinked?
Luke Busbridge outlines a case that provides a reminder of the rules on reservation of benefit ‘The executors argued that because the covenants given in the sub-lease were intrinsically bound up in Lady Hood’s gift in the first place, it was impossible to separate them out in the way that HMRC had done.’ Viscount Hood …
Cases Referenced
Cases in bold have further reading - click to view related articles.
- Buzzoni & ors v HMRC [2013] EWCA Civ 1684; [2014] WTLR 421 CA
- Commissioner for Stamp Duties of New South Wales v Perpetual Trustee Company Ltd [1943] UKPC 20
- Hood v HMRC [2017] WTLR 999
- In re Nichols [1975] 1 WLR 534
- Ingram & anor v IRC [1998] UKHL 47
- St Aubyn v Attorney-General [1951] UKHL 3
- Viscount Hood (executor of the estate of Lady Hood) v HMRC [2018] EWCA Civ 2405