Wills & Trusts Law Reports | March 2014 #137The trustees of two family settlements applied to the court for authorisation of action that they proposed to take. David Holden-Hindley created the No 7 Settlement in 1973 for the benefit of his children, issue, his sister-in-law and her children and his sister Doreen Hindley and her children and issue. His brother Airlie set up a similar trust the No 9 Settlement in 1975 but only his children and those of his sister Doreen were beneficiaries. In both settlements illegitimate children were excluded.
In 1983 two deeds of appointments were made under the two settlements for the ben...
Holden-Hindley v Holden-Hindley clarifies the court’s approach towards settlements which exclude illegitimate children. Charlotte Searle explains ‘In modern society, the decision to allow illegitimate children to be treated in the same way as legitimate children does appear to be a pragmatic and fair one, even if the grounds on which similar cases have been distinguished …
Continue reading "Illegitimacy And Trusts: Benefiting child and parent"
This post is only available to members.
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | November 2011 #114The trustees (the bank) appealed from the decision of Vos J to dismiss an appeal against a determination by HMRC. HMRC had decided that the residuary estates of Constance and William Poppleston were to be treated as if they were part of the estate of Edwin Poppleston (the son of Constance and William) because s89 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (the Act) required Edwin to be treated as if he had an interest in possession in each of them. If Edwin was not to be treated as if he had such interests in possession then HMRC was liable to repay the bank £158,963 with interest.
Edwin wa...
