Rogge & anr v Rogge & ors [2019] WTLR 1305
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2019 #177The first and second claimants had four children, three of whom were the defendants. The third defendant suffered a serious brain injury while playing polo and was left unable to walk unaided. The first and second claimants purchased two contiguous flats in London, one for themselves and the other for the third defendant. They also sought a house in the countryside which would serve both as a retirement home for themselves and as a place for their children and potential future grandchildren to visit, with an area designed to meet the needs of the third defendant. In February 2011 they id...
Barclays v HMRC [2011] EWCA Civ 810
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | November 2011 #114The trustees (the bank) appealed from the decision of Vos J to dismiss an appeal against a determination by HMRC. HMRC had decided that the residuary estates of Constance and William Poppleston were to be treated as if they were part of the estate of Edwin Poppleston (the son of Constance and William) because s89 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (the Act) required Edwin to be treated as if he had an interest in possession in each of them. If Edwin was not to be treated as if he had such interests in possession then HMRC was liable to repay the bank £158,963 with interest.
Edwin wa...