Tolley v No Defendant [2023] WTLR 1187
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2023 #192Caroline Fisher was an only child and her parents were deceased. In September 2020 she made a will appointing the claimant, her friend, as her executor. In January 2022, she drove into the sea and had not been seen since. The claimant issued a CPR Part 8 claim under the Presumption of Death Act 2013 for a declaration of presumption of death before the will had been proved. Section 1(5) of the 2013 Act provides that the court must refuse to hear the application if:
- (a) it is made by someone other than a missing person’s spouse, civil partne...
Goodrich & ors v AB & ors [2022] WTLR 525
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2022 #187W was the founder of WBL, an internationally renowned publisher of children’s books. In 1989 W instructed solicitors to create an employee trust (WBET) for WBL and transferred 51% of the WBL shares into WBET. The remainder of the shares were divided amongst family trusts established by W.
W died in 1991 and the shares in WBL held by the family trusts were distributed to employees and officers of WBL through a qualifying employee share ownership trust and a share incentive plan. Some of those shares were acquired from employees by the WBL Employee Share Ownership Plan (ESOP).
<...Hand & anr v George & anr [2017] EWHC 533 (Ch)
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2017 #168By his will dated 6 May 1946 Henry Hand (testator) directed his trustees to hold his residuary estate upon trust as to one equal third part (Kenneth’s share) to pay the income thereof to his son Kenneth Hand during his life and on his death as to both capital and income thereof for such of his children as attained the age of 21 years and if more than one in equal shares. In default of children, Kenneth’s share was directed to pass to the testator’s children, Gordon Hand and Joan George. The testator died on 9 June 1947 survived by all three children. Gordon Hand died without issue on 15 ...
Gregg & anr v Pigott & ors [2012] EWHC 732 (Ch)
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | July/August 2012 #121The court was asked to construe the phrase ‘statutory next of kin’ in a settlement that was executed in 1948. It was common ground that, under the classic rules of construction, that phrase would have excluded adopted children because the intestacy rules in 1948 did not benefit adopted children. However, the adopted children argued that they were entitled to capital and income under the trust in preference to their distant cousins who would have benefited under the intestacy rules as enacted in 1948. The adopted children argued that to prevent them benefiting would be a breac...