Dukeries Healthcare Ltd v Bay Trust International Ltd & ors [2021] WTLR 809
Autumn 2021 #184The claims concerned various tax avoidance schemes that had been established as ‘Remuneration Trusts’ for the claimants by Baxendale Walker LLP. The claimants were a successful businessman, Mr Levack, and various businesses of which he was a director and/or shareholder. In each case, one of the claimants was the ‘founder’ of the relevant trust. The defendants were various corporate entities having had a role in the trusts, together with HMRC.
The claimants maintained that the Remuneration Trusts had been entered into on the basis that they would offer various tax benefits, and wou...
Equiom (Isle of Man) Ltd & ors v Velarde & ors [2021] WTLR 855
Autumn 2021 #184The claimants were the trustees of a settlement settled by the deceased’s father. The defendants were the deceased’s three children. Under the terms of the settlement the deceased enjoyed a special power of appointment which could be exercised in respect of property described in the fund, whether by deeds revocable or irrevocable or by will or codicil. The deceased had exercised this power twice. First, by a deed of appointment in 1981, with effect from her death, the deceased appointed the fund between the three defendants. Second, by a deed of revocation in 1997, expressed to be supple...
Hudman v Morris [2021] WTLR 877
Autumn 2021 #184The claimant was the executrix and one of five residuary beneficiaries of the estate of her late father. The defendant, her brother, was the co-executor and a fellow residuary beneficiary. The claimant brought a Part 8 claim under s50 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 to remove the defendant as executor and, alternatively, sought an order that the defendant be passed over pursuant to s116 of the Senior Courts Act 1981. The claimant also sought the appointment of an independent administrator and was voluntarily willing to step down as executrix ...
Hughes v Pritchard & ors [2021] WTLR 893
Autumn 2021 #184The deceased (E) died in March 2017 aged 84. The deceased’s last will was executed in July 2016 with the assistance of solicitors and after a capacity assessment was obtained from his GP. At the time of making his will, the deceased was suffering from moderately severe dementia and was grieving from the death of his eldest son (S) who had taken his own life in September 2015. The will changed the provisions of an earlier will in favour of the claimant (C), also a son of E, inter alia, leaving 58 acres of farmland to C.
The defendants were the sister, widow and eldest son ...
Pescatore v Valentino & ors [2021] WTLR 917
Autumn 2021 #184The claimant, a Mongolian national, was the second wife and widow of the deceased. She applied for an interim anti-suit injunction against two of the three defendants, the deceased’s adult children, restraining them from continuing proceedings against her in Italy pending a trial of a dispute concerning the deceased’s will in England.
The deceased was born in Italy, but was a naturalised British citizen. He had lived in England for 58 years until his death, aged 78, in 2018. His entire working life had been in England. He paid tax in the UK. He had raised a family in England (incl...
Re Shanavazi [2021] WTLR 1037
Autumn 2021 #184The claimant was the widow of Gohlam Dastagir Shanavazi (the deceased), who had died intestate on 29 December 2011. They had five children of whom four were adults by the time of the hearing. The claimant brought the Part 8 claim on behalf of the youngest child, her minor son Ilyas Firas Shanavazi, who was now 16.
Under German law Ilyas was entitled to a 1/10th share of his father’s estate. The claim was brought to allow the claimant on behalf of Ilyas to enter into a contract of sale of a property in Germany and to convey the property to the purchaser.
The claimant, the de...
Smith & anr v Michelmores Trust Corporation Ltd & ors [2021] WTLR 1051
Autumn 2021 #184The testatrix (T), whose husband predeceased her, was survived by her four children, B1, B2, B3 and B4. T had appointed B3 and the partners of a solicitor firm as the executors of her will. She left the residue of her estate on trust to be divided into four equal shares: one for the benefit of each of B1, B2 and B3, and the fourth upon discretionary trusts, which included a wide power of appointment, for the benefit of B4 and his children and remoter issue. At the time of the hearing, B4 had three adult children and one minor grandchild. T died in 2010 and probate of her will was granted...
Smith & anr v Michelmores Trust Corporation Ltd & ors (costs) [2021] WTLR 1083
Autumn 2021 #184A testatrix (T) left the residue of her estate (the trust fund) on trust to be divided into four equal shares, directing that one of them (the share fund) be held upon discretionary trusts for the benefit of her son, B, and his children and remoter issue. The other three shares were given to her other three children absolutely. The will trustees (who were the executrix of T’s will and another person appointed by her as a co-trustee) sought the approval of the court for a proposed appointment of all of the liquid funds in the share fund to B absolutely. The judge refused to approve the pr...
Thomas v Thomas & ors [2021] WTLR 1091
Autumn 2021 #184Elizabeth Thomas (Elizabeth) passed away in 2018, leaving a will dated 30 September 2004. She was survived by her three sons, David, Owen and Gareth, and her 13 grandchildren.
Her will included, among others the following terms:
‘If my husband has [predeceased me]… I leave my property to be divided amongst my sons and their heirs. At present, these are as follows:… Sons — Owen, Gareth and David; their children are Owen/Fay; Gareth/Gwennan and Samuel and Raphael; David/Ellen Christie Thomas and Jens Rhys Thomas… ’
‘The proceeds fro...
Titcombe v Ison [2021] WTLR 1101
Autumn 2021 #184D was a close friend of the deceased and the sole beneficiary under the deceased’s will. C was the deceased’s niece. C claimed that a collection of jewellery in the estate was impressed with a secret trust in her favour, or alternatively that D was estopped from denying that the jewellery was held for C’s benefit.
C alleged that, in a Skype conversation in March 2013, the deceased had suggested that she wanted C to have her jewellery, C had said this was very generous and that she would love to receive it; that the deceased had said that rather than leaving it to C in the will, sh...