Henchley & ors v Thompson [2018] WTLR 1289

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2018 #170

The claimants were the beneficiaries of two trusts created by the late WCC Henchley (‘Settlor’). The NE Henchley Trust (‘First Trust’), dated 1 September 1960, provided for the trust assets to be held upon trust for the Settlor’s wife for life or until remarriage with remainder for such of his children as were then living and if more than one in equal shares. The trust assets, which once included bank accounts and a portfolio of investments, now consisted of the residence of the Settlor’s wife at 395 Cockfosters Road, Whaddon Lodge (‘Property’). By a Deed of Appointment dated 20 November...

Watts v Watts Claim no: HC02C02559

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | December 2014 #145

The claimant Arthur Watts (Arthur) sued his brother James Watts (James) in respect of trust transactions in 1998.

In 1967 Geoffrey Watts, the father of Arthur and James, made a settlement in favour of his children and grandchildren. In 1976 this trust fund was split into separate trust funds for each of Geoffrey’s children. James was one of the trustees of Arthur’s trust fund. The main beneficiaries were Arthur in his lifetime and thereafter his legitimate children. Clause 4 allowed the trustees to pay all the capital to Arthur if they considered it to be to his advantage...

Pullan v Wilson & ors [2014] EWHC 126 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | May 2014 #139

The claimant (Mr Pullan) was a beneficiary of ten high-value family trusts. The first defendant (Mr Wilson) was an accountant who had been appointed as a professional trustee of those trusts. Mr Wilson was also a non-executive director of three of the companies in which the trusts held shares. The second and third defendants were the co-trustees of the ten trusts and were not subject to the relief sought by Mr Pullan.

Mr Pullan brought a claim against Mr Wilson as he considered that the professional charges of £849,890 for the period from 12 March 2007 to 4 November 2010 exceeded...

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...