Fantini v Scrutton & ors [2020] WTLR 1273
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2020 #181The claim was brought by the executor of the estate of Iris Mary Fantini. Iris and Gloria Fantini were mother and daughter respectively. They jointly owned a property at 7 Merlin Way, Mudeford, Dorset. Gloria predeceased Iris. The application was brought under Part 64 of the CPR to determine whether the joint tenancy was severed by Gloria and whether Iris’s estate’s costs of the claim should be met from the remaining sale proceeds of the property.
On 5 December 2013 Gloria had executed a will and signed a notice purporting to sever the joint tenancy under s36(2) of the In 15 separate applications under s23(1) Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), the Public Guardian (PG) asked the court to determine the effect of language used in lasting powers of attorney which he was asked to register. Some were withdrawn, leaving 11. The common theme was that each instrument expressed an intention that the attorney use the donor ‘s assets to benefit someone other than the donor. PS: Under the heading ‘Preferences ‘, the donor entered the words ‘The needs of [LS] before anyone else ‘. Under the heading ‘Instructions ‘, she entered the words ...
Facts In October 2002 the testator (T) and the first claimant (C1) bought Little Hendra Farm, Looe, Cornwall (the farm). They purchased as joint tenants. The farm consisted of a bungalow and some fields, within three registered titles. Title X included Village Field and Title Y included the Bungalow and Borehole and Church Fields. In fact, Title Z was the subject of a conveyancing mix-up, which was discovered later and resolved in 2008 by a transfer of the title, using form TR1, to T and C1 expressly as ‘joint tenants’. In 2007, T and C1 made wills in substantially similar ...
W and M were married in 1969 and divorced in 1974. During their marriage, they bought a leasehold property with the proceeds of their former matrimonial home and a mortgage loan for the balance. The benefit of the long lease of the property was conveyed to them as joint tenants. M moved out of the property in 1973 and began divorce proceedings. No steps were taken in the divorce to deal with the ownership of the house, which remained vested in them as joint tenants. After M left the property, W had treated it as his own, insuring, maintaining and improving it and, soon after the divorce,...
On 9 September 2012, the first respondent (Dr Boff) executed a lasting power of attorney for property and financial affairs, in which she appointed her husband to be her sole attorney, and then attempted to appoint three replacement attorneys in order of succession. Dr Boff’s husband, the second respondent (Mr Boff), executed a virtually identical LPA on the same day and they applied to the Office of the Public Guardian (the OPG) to register the instruments. On 7 November 2012, the OPG wrote to Dr Boff’s solicitors stating that they were unable to register the LPAs on ...
Kiritkumar Mahendersinh Mahida (testator) and his wife, the defendant, owned (inter alia) freehold property at 148-152 Leytonstone Road London as beneficial joint tenants. They were, however, separated when the testator made his last will (will) on 17 July 2002. After appointing the first and second claimants his executors and trustees, the testator gave certain property to his brother, the third claimant, and his three sons, the fourth to sixth claimants. In particular, by clause 3(c) he gave them an interest in the property at Leytonstone Road, but unfortunately expressed the ...
In the matter of Various Lasting Powers of Attorney [2019] WTLR 1443
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2019 #177Lee & anr v Lee & anr [2018] WTLR 197
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2018 #171Wall v Munday
[2018] WTLR 337
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2018 #171Re Boff 12338771
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | October 2013 #133Joshi & ors v Mahida [2013] EWHC 486 (Ch)
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2013 #130