Mistake: Fault lines

Kennedy v Kennedy [2015] expands the horizons of the doctrine of mistake. Steven Kempster and Sarah Aughwane explain ‘If a trustee makes a causative mistake of sufficient gravity, the transaction is voidable even if the mistake is as to the tax consequences.’ Two years ago the Supreme Court heard the joined appeals in Pitt v …
This post is only available to members.

Futter & anr v HMRC; Pitt & anr v HMRC [2013] WTLR 977

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | July/August 2013 #131

The first appeal concerned two settlements, made with non-resident trustees, by Mr Futter. Considerable ‘stockpiled’ gains were rolled up while the trusts were non-resident and, in exercise of the powers conferred by the trusts, new resident trustees were appointed and capital was distributed to Mr Futter and his children in the mistaken belief that the ‘stockpiled’ gains, which would be attributed to them, would be absorbed by allowable losses that had been realised, so that no liability to capital gains tax would arise. In advising as to the effect of s87 of the Taxation a...

Equity: To the rescue

Lisa Springate and Dina El-Gazzar examine the importance of the landmark decision in Re The Shinorvic Trust ‘With modern family relationships and changed social attitudes, obligations to support financially now extend to a much wider category of people. For example, illegitimate children, stepchildren, and same-sex partners.’ The decision in the recent case of Re The …
This post is only available to members.

Re The Shinorvic Trust [2012] JRC081

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | March 2013 #127

The Shinorvic Trust (the trust) was established by VB (the settlor) on 19 July 1988. The trust was a discretionary trust governed by Jersey law. The original trustees of the trust were the Radcliffes Trustee Company SA (Radcliffe) and the original beneficiaries were the settlor’s sister MF and her children and remoter issue. Clause 2(3) of the trust deed conferred a power on the settlor to add beneficiaries. The power to add was exercisable by ‘instrument’ executed by the settlor. Clause 2(1)(f) of the trust deed defined an ‘instrument’ as ...

Trustees: Hastings-Bass overturned?

Marilyn McKeever looks at the implications for trustees and their advisers in the pivotal case Futter v Futter ‘The purpose of the rule in Hastings-Bass was to protect the beneficiaries, not the trustees. The effect of the new rule in Futter is to reduce that protection significantly.’ In Futter & anor v Futter & ors …
This post is only available to members.