JTC Employer Ser Trustees Ltd v Khadem [2022] WTLR 203

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2022 #186

Mr Khadem’s employer established a pension plan for him, with HMRC approval, which was tailored for employees who may retire abroad. On his retirement in 2004 he remained in England as his wife continued to work as a consultant and professor. As his wife approached her retirement they discussed where they should live and decided to move to the UAE, which Mr Khadem did in March 2018.

The claimant and Mr Khadem each took tax advice on 12 December 2018. It was to the effect that the UAE only provides a tax domicile certificate covering the period up to the date of the application for...

Causation: Statistics in medicine

Ian Meikle considers the approach to causation in the clinical negligence case of Schembri v Marshall [2020] ‘Statistics may be the main evidential aid to what would have happened in hypothetical situations, but they are still only trends.’ The Court of Appeal addressed the appropriate approach to causation in a medical negligence case where a …
This post is only available to members.

Group Seven Ltd & anr v Notable Services LLP & anr [2019] WTLR 803

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2019 #176

These appeals arose from the a ‘brazen fraud’ by which Allseas Group SA was defrauded of €100 million. After the fraud took place, there was an attempt to launder the proceeds through the client account of a London firm of solicitors, Notable Services LLP, whose partners included Mr Landman. Police intervention secured the return of €88 million – the present proceedings concerned attempts to recover the remainder of this sum from Notable, Mr Landman, Mr Louanjli (a bank employee who provided information to Notable) and LLB Verwaltung, the bank who employed him (”the Bank”).

In add...

Causation: Looking for answers

Paul Sankey examines the issues in Dr Sido John v Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust ‘The “material contribution” test only applies in cases where it is impossible to attribute particular damage to a specific cause and therefore apportionment cannot be appropriate.’The recent case of Dr Sido John v Central Manchester …
This post is only available to members.

Causation: The sum of the parts

Matthew White weighs up the ‘but for’ test and material contribution in cumulative cause cases ‘The “material contribution” approach applies just as much to multiple factor cases as to single agency cases.’ An article in this publication in 2013 (‘Breach of duty and causation, where are we now?’ by Christopher Sharp QC and Matthew White, …
This post is only available to members.

Causation: Reducing damages due to pre-existing conditions – a tenable argument?

Julian Matthews discusses two recent cases which illustrate the potentially far reaching consequences of the rules of causation of damage ‘These cases clearly illustrate that the focus of attention in the assessment of damages in cases where there is a medical or other disability subsisting prior to the date of negligence must be upon the …
This post is only available to members.

Novoship (UK) Limited & ors v Nikitin & ors [2014] EWCA Civ 908

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | November 2014 #144

Mr Mikhaylyuk (M), a manager for the first respondent, NOUK, with responsibility for negotiating the charters of vessels owned by companies within the Novoship group, the remaining respondents, owed fiduciary duties to all the respondents. M had arranged a series of schemes by which he defrauded his principals and enriched himself and others by the payment of bribes given to him by those who chartered his principals’ vessels. These schemes included one concerning vessels chartered to companies owned and controlled by Mr Ruperti (R) which R then sub-chartered at substantially higher rates...

Feltham v Bouskell [2013] EWHC 1952(Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | October 2013 #133

The defendant firm of solicitors had acted for Hazel Charlton (testatrix) of 12 Cecilia Road, Leicester, in relation to a will that she had made on 14 May 1998 (1998 will). The testatrix, who had been previously married twice, had spent the last 20 years with her partner, John Fishbein, latterly living in his house at Barton on Sea. Apart from Mr Fishbein, the residuary beneficiaries of the 1998 will were respectively the testatrix’s cousin, Mrs Atkinson, and friend, Dr Bhangoo. The claimant, who was a step-granddaughter of the testatrix by her second husband, was not a beneficiary...

Mason & ors v Mills & Reeve [2011] EWHC 410 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | November 2011 #114

Christopher Swain (C) built up a very successful business and held 72% of the shares in a group of companies in which each of his four daughters also held 5.3% of the shares. He was advised by a small firm of chartered accountants who prepared tax returns for him, the company and the family trusts and at times for each of his daughters and by a small firm of solicitors who prepared his will, dated 17 January 2006. C decided to sell his company to the management and to use Mills & Reeve, a large full-service law firm (the firm) to advise him and his daughters on the MBO. In June 2006 ...