This category can only be viewed by members.
Geoffrey Shindler contemplates how trust and estate practice has changed over the last 15 years ‘Regulation was invented to deal with the evils of the world: drug trafficking, extortion, prostitution, etc. But legislative creep has occurred and that has lead us to where we are.’If you were asked what have been the most important changes …
Continue reading "Musings From Manchester: The evolution of legislative creep"
This post is only available to members.
Philip Youdan and Russell Simpson look at Page v Hewetts, which provides guidance on issuing a claim in accordance with the Limitation Act 1980 ‘The judgment in Page v Hewetts provided important clarification on what is necessary to issue a claim in compliance with the Limitation Act 1980.’ The recent case of Page v Hewetts …
Continue reading "Estate Administration: Know your limits"
This post is only available to members.
Brudenell-Bruce offers salutary lessons about the self-dealing rule, as Simon Atkinson explains ‘Brudenell-Bruce provides a restatement of the law relating to estoppel by deed and applies principles of construction to deeds and consent orders.’ For chancery practitioners Brudenell-Bruce (Earl of Cardigan) v Moore and Cotton [2012] provides valuable guidance in a number of areas. The …
Continue reading "Trustees: Self-dealing – rigours and risks"
This post is only available to members.
David Schmitz considers whether the will must be present when a testator acknowledges their signature to witnesses ‘The existence of a perceived danger of substitution in some cases, and the desirability of reducing the need for oral evidence in consequent litigation, can justify the inference that the draftsman did intend to impose a requirement for …
Continue reading "Wills: An unresolved question"
This post is only available to members.
Sian Hodgson gives the lowdown on executor’s costs in litigation, with reference to the recent case of Taylor v Saunders ‘An executor who has been involved in the preparation and execution of a will, in which he is also appointed executor, may naturally wish to “defend” that will’ The issue of an executor’s costs in …
Continue reading "Executor’s Costs: Neutrality is key"
This post is only available to members.
Geoffrey Shindler advocates positive action in the light of the Lord Chancellor’s rejection of the Legal Services Board’s recommendations on will writing ‘Unless a significant amount of powerful new evidence is produced, no further regulation will be considered for will writers.’To universal cries of disappointment, but not entirely unsurprisingly, the recommendations made to the Lord …
Continue reading "Musings From Manchester: Speaking with one voice"
This post is only available to members.
Marilyn McKeever discusses the implications of the Supreme Court decision in Futter v Futter and Pitt v Holt ‘The Hastings-Bass jurisdiction applies where the trustee or other person has failed to take into account any relevant considerations or took into account irrelevant considerations and would not have taken the action they did but for that …
Continue reading "Trustees: Back on the right course?"
This post is only available to members.
Imogen Buchan-Smith sets out the key points of the much-anticipated GAAR ‘While the GAAR’s purpose is “the counteraction of tax advantages arising from tax arrangements that are abusive”, and the taxes included within its scope are clear, the actual arrangements that the government intends will fall within its ambit may be less so.’The introduction of …
Continue reading "Tax Planning: Curtailing abuse"
This post is only available to members.
Dawn Goodman and Geoffrey Kertesz discuss a case that clarifies the grounds upon which protectors can be removed, and also sounds a note of caution for a common practice in the trust industry Protectors who engage in conduct that is beyond their remit (and perhaps trustee-like in nature) may be placing the entire structure at …
Continue reading "Trust Protectors: Above and beyond the call of duty"
This post is only available to members.
Sharon Kenchington analyses a case that affirms the existence of a judicial ‘safety net’ to protect vulnerable adults who retain capacity so do not fall under the MCA 2005 or the Court of Protection ‘In the Re F decision, Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR affirmed the use of the common law as a ‘great safety …
Continue reading "Mental Capacity: Safeguarding adults at risk"
This post is only available to members.
