March 2014 #154 – Law Journals

Musings From Manchester: Plus ça change

Geoffrey Shindler considers how the court dealt with will and trust disputes in 1914 ‘Despite the fact that people have been dying ever since they were born and that trust law in this country is probably 700 years old, we were (and still are) finding problems that the law has not previously resolved.’We are going …

Continue reading "Musings From Manchester: Plus ça change"

This post is only available to members.

IHT: Managing your exit

Anna Moore sets out the next stage in the simplification of trust tax charges ‘HMRC have confirmed that they are “committed to ensuring fairness in the tax system and reducing undue burdens on trustees and their advisers”.’ In December 2013, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) published a summary of the responses received to their second …

Continue reading "IHT: Managing your exit"

This post is only available to members.

Rectification: Common sense or a slippery slope?

Alison Regan analyses the implications of the Supreme Court decision in Marley v Rawlings ‘Lord Neuberger stated that Mr Rawlings had signed a document which he believed to be his will in the presence of two witnesses and that he had to be the testator as he had signed the will.’ On 22 January 2014 …

Continue reading "Rectification: Common sense or a slippery slope?"

This post is only available to members.

Wills: Challenging the validity of a will

Siân Hodgson discusses the tactics employed in Tociapski v Tociapski ‘Tociapski v Tociapski may act as a warning to potential defendants who may be considering whether or not to actively take part in proceedings.’ Following a person’s death, there may be a dispute about whether that person’s last will is valid. Relatives or close friends …

Continue reading "Wills: Challenging the validity of a will"

This post is only available to members.

Undue Influence: After Etridge

Nigel Thomas examines unconscionable bargains and presumed undue influence, with reference to Evans v Lloyd ‘This was a case of presumed undue influence and that being so then the claimants were required to prove (i) a relationship of trust and confidence and (ii) a transaction that calls for explanation.’ Some might be surprised that cases …

Continue reading "Undue Influence: After Etridge"

This post is only available to members.

Partnerships: Market value?

Ian Partridge looks at Ham v Ham, which considers the valuation of a share in a farming partnership when one partner exits ‘There is no room for a presumption (at least in the context of a family partnership) that the partners do or do not intend that a retiring or deceased partner should receive full …

Continue reading "Partnerships: Market value?"

This post is only available to members.

Illegitimacy And Trusts: Benefiting child and parent

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.

Limitation Act: Recorded delivery?

Philip Youdan provides an update on Page v Hewetts ‘Page v Hewetts [2013] demonstrates clearly that the burden lies with the party bringing the proceedings to show that, on the balance of probabilities, the papers have been received at court.’ The case of Page v Hewetts [2013] involved allegations of dishonest conduct by a solicitor …

Continue reading "Limitation Act: Recorded delivery?"

This post is only available to members.