The claimant (a trust corporation) was appointed as deputy for property and financial affairs for the first defendant. The claimant instructed IMAM (an investment manager) to invest the first defendant’s funds. IMAM was part of the same corporate group as the claimant (IMAM was wholly owned by IMHL, and IMHL wholly owned IMLLP which wholly owned the claimant).
During a statutory will application, the Official Solicitor expressed concern about the appointment of IMAM. The court directed the claimant to apply for retrospective authority to instruct IMAM.
The claimant’s eviden...
A testator appointed as executors her brother, Mr Hayward, and the partners of the defendant, a firm of solicitors. At the time of the testator’s death Mr Shepherd and another solicitor, Mr Smyth, were the only partners in the defendant. Mr Hayward and Mr Shepherd took probate. The will did not contain a charging clause.
The claimant was a residuary beneficiary and the occupant of the testator’s home. The claimant refused to move out and an issue also arose over a loan made by the testator to the claimant. To progress these matters and the administration of the estate, the executo...
Continue reading "Fiduciary Duties: Staying virtuous"
L applied pursuant to s8(1) of the Administration of Estates Act 1990 to remove M as her co-executor and co-trustee of the estate of their father. The beneficiaries of the estate were L (50 percent) and M’s two children (50 percent). The estate was modest including some personal chattels, a small bank account and a property worth circa £210,000.
M and his wife had issued a claim against the estate for £170,229, allegedly owed for nursing care provided to the deceased (the litigation).
L averred that M should be removed as trustee due to the ligation ...
This decision concerned the construction of a trust deed dated 28 November 1944 (the deed) made between Eric Max Warburg on behalf of the Warburg family, Viscount Lee of Fareham on behalf of the Warburg Society, and the University of London (UOL). There arose questions about the scope of the deed, the ownership of property, the status of funding and the propriety of the administration by UOL under the deed. UOL brought a construction summons to determine these questions at the behest of HM Attorney General (the second defendant). The first defendant was Professor John Prag, of the Univer...
Continue reading "Charity Law Update: Responsible giving"