Continue reading "Mistake: Ignorance is not bliss"
Bhaur & ors v Equity First Trustees (Nevis) Ltd & ors [2023] WTLR 851
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2023 #192In March 2007 Safe Investments Management UK (Safe), an unlimited company, transferred its shares in Gooch Investment (Gooch) to Equity Trust (BVI) Ltd, a trust company (2007 transfer), to be held on the terms of a settlement for the benefit of qualifying employees of Safe (First Staff Remuneration Trust). This transfer followed the transfer of interests in UK business assets (the estate) from the first and second appellants (Mr and Mrs Bhaur) to Safe and from Safe to its subsidiary Gooch. All these transfers took place as part of a tax scheme (scheme) promoted by Mr O’Toole, who operate...
Naidoo v Barton & anr [2023] WTLR 1047
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2023 #192Nirmalathevie Naidoo (Mrs Naidoo) died on 10 February 2016. Her husband, Dr Govindarajaloo Naidoo (Dr Naidoo), had predeceased her on 12 January 1999. They had two daughters and five sons. The first defendant, David Barton (Mr Barton) (formerly known as Ramamurthie Naidoo), was one of their children, and his wife (Mrs Barton) was the second defendant. The claimant was another of their children.
By this claim, the claimant sought:
- (1) an order pronouncing in solemn form for the validity of Mrs Naidoo’s will dated 21 July 2015 (the 2015 will), by which he was appointed ...
Hopes & anr v Burton & ors [2023] WTLR 187
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2023 #190The claimant trustees sought to set aside two deeds of appointment dated 31 May 2013 and 22 July 2014 on the grounds of operative mistake, excess of powers or lack of proper consideration.
The trust was settled in 1992 when taking out a policy of life insurance, and provided that subject to and in default of any exercise of the trustees’ powers of appointment, the trust fund and its income was held absolutely for the ‘Immediate Beneficiaries’ as defined in the deed. The settlor died in 2004 but the trustees did not become aware of the policy until late 2012. The trustees discussed...
JTC Employer Ser Trustees Ltd v Khadem [2022] WTLR 203
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2022 #186Mr 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...
Bhaur & ors v Equity First Trustees (Nevis) Ltd & ors WTLR(w) 2022-01
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Web OnlyMistake: Forgiven, but not rewritten
Continue reading "Mistake: Forgiven, but not rewritten"
Dukeries Healthcare Ltd v Bay Trust International Ltd & ors [2021] WTLR 809
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | 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...
Ralph v Ralph WTLR(w) 2021-04
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Web OnlyA house was purchased in the joint names of the defendant and his son, the claimant. At least part of the reason for the claimant’s inclusion was that it allowed the defendant to benefit from a mortgage needed to finance the purchase. The TR1 bore an ‘X’ in Box 11 which appeared next to the words ‘the transferees are to hold the property on trust for themselves as tenants in common in equal shares’. The claimant sought a declaration that the property was held as described by Box 11 and an order for sale. The defendant maintained in a number of witness statements that the ticking of Box 1...