Constandas v Lysandrou & ors [2018] WTLR 19
Spring 2018 #171The claimant claimed a beneficial interest in a residential property registered in the joint names of the first and second defendants, his sister and brother-in-law respectively, on the basis that in 1959 he paid £600 towards the purchase price. By the time the matter came to trial in October 2015 both first and second defendants had lost capacity.
Giving judgment at first instance, HHJ Faber found both claimant and defendant witnesses to be unreliable. She concluded that on the evidence available she could not arrive at any finding as to who had made the £600 downpayment in 1959,...
Creggy v Barnett & anr [2018] WTLR 35
Spring 2018 #171In 1998 the appellant solicitor transferred $1.2m without his clients’ knowledge and authority and in breach of fiduciary duty to the respondents. Proceedings were issued in 2012. The appellant argued the claim was statute-barred pursuant to s21(3) Limitation Act 1980. The respondents relied upon a letter written by the appellant in 2006 as constituting an acknowledgement of the claim for the purposes of s29(5) of the Act, which provides:
‘where any right of action has accrued to recover… any debt or other liquidated pecuniary claim… and the person li...
Dawson-Damer & ors v Taylor Wessing LLP & anr [2018] WTLR 57
Spring 2018 #171The appellants were beneficiaries of a number of Bahamian trusts; the respondent solicitors (‘TW’) act on behalf of the trustee of these trusts. On 4 August 2014, the appellants served a subject access request (‘SAR’) on TW, requesting disclosure of the personal data relating to the appellants held by TW as the solicitors for the trustee. The appellants were not satisfied by TW’s response to the SAR. They therefore applied to the court to exercise its discretion under s.7(9) of the Data Protection Act 1998 (‘DPA’), and grant a declaration that TW had not complied with t...
Blackwell Deceased [2018] WTLR 1243
Winter 2018 #170The applicant, Mr Warner, was the unmarried partner of the deceased. Before her death they had lived together for 19 years at a property in Tewkesbury. Mr Warner continued to live in this property after her death. Mrs Lewis, the daughter of the deceased, brought a claim in the County Court for possession of the property and for the return of certain items under the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977. Mr Warner defended this claim, and made a separate application for relief under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (‘the 1975 Act’). It was agreed by the pa...
Smith v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust & ors [2018] WTLR 1469
Winter 2018 #170The claimant had cohabited with her partner for 11 years until his untimely death, which was caused by the admitted negligence of the first and second defendants.
Under s1 of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 (FAA), the claimant, as a cohabiting partner for more than two years, was entitled to bring a claim for damages as a dependant of the deceased. This claim was settled by the first and second defendants, who then took no active role in these proceedings. However, the claimant was not able to bring a claim for bereavement damages under s1A FAA, as...
Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Ltd & anr v HMRC [2017] WTLR 917
Autumn 2017 #169This appeal concerned the first periodic charge which fell due on a Jersey-resident discretionary trust established by the settlor, Mr Dreelan (‘the Settlor’) on 21 June 2001 (‘the 2001 Settlement’).
The Settlor transferred £100 to Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Limited (‘the Trustee’) to hold on trusts in broad discretionary form. The beneficiaries were the Settlor, his spouse and his children then living or born during the trust period. At this date the Settlor was not domiciled in the UK for IHT purposes.
The Trustee lent part of the settled funds to a wholly-owned Je...
Routier & anr v HMRC [2017] WTLR 1119
Autumn 2017 #169The appeal concerned the restriction (the Restriction) imposed by s23 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA), as interpreted by the Court of Appeal in an earlier hearing of the appeal, on IHT relief for legacies and gifts to charities, to legacies and gifts to UK charities subject to the supervision of the UK courts. The question was whether the Restriction violated the EU law principle of freedom of movement of capital so as not to be enforceable in relation to a legacy of an estate with assets situate in the UK to a Jersey charity.
There were three sub-issues:
- (1) W...
Armstrong v Onyearu [2017] EWCA Civ 268
Summer 2017 #168Mr and Mrs Onyearu were a married couple. Mr Onyearu was declared bankrupt in 2011 and Mr Armstrong was his trustee in bankruptcy. The question before the Court was whether Mrs Onyearu could rely upon the equity of exoneration in order to take a charge over her husband’s share of the matrimonial home.
Mr Onyearu was the sole registered proprietor of the matrimonial home in Catford (purchased in 2000), and he and his wife maintained that they beneficially owned the property in equal shares. In 2005, a loan facility was granted to Mr Onyearu by Bank of Scotland in order to pr...
Magiera v Magiera [2016] EWCA Civ 1292
March 2017 #167The parties were previously married. In 1990, they acquired a house in London in their joint names. In April/May 2014, the wife issued an application under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (‘TLATA 1996‘) seeking an order for sale of the house, together with an order that the net proceeds be distributed between herself and her husband in equal shares. The husband contested the jurisdiction of the English court to entertain the wife’s proceedings and applied for them to be dismissed or stayed. The wife argued that England and Wales...
Matchmove v Dowding & anr [2016] EWCA Civ 1233
March 2017 #167The appellant appealed a decision regarding the enforceability of an agreement to sell a piece of land through proprietary estoppel and constructive trust notwithstanding the absence of a written contract.
F, a property developer, was the moving spirit of the appellant (M). In 2002, F began negotiations with G for the purchase of a plot of land (the land) and a meadow (the meadow). F intended to divide the land into two plots. Plot 1 and plot 2 would be sold separately. G did not want to sell until he had planning permission, which was granted in 2003.
By late 2003, a ‘comm...