Fullard v Kershaw & ors [2022] WTLR 1323
Winter 2022 #189The issue before the court was costs in proceedings relating to the estate of Richard Stephen Fullard (the testator), who died on 4 April 2020. By a will dated 20 June 2019 (the will), the testator appointed the following as executors and trustees of his will: the claimant, his son; the first defendant, his friend; the second defendant, his partner; and the third claimant, his daughter. By the will the testator also bequeathed one property to the second defendant, and another property to the claimant and third defendant. He made various pecuniary legacies, including to the first defendan...
Ingham & anr v Wardman & ors [2022] WTLR 1337
Winter 2022 #189The appellants (the Inghams) appealed against an interlocutory ruling which set aside a privacy order.
In the proceedings below, the Inghams were seeking permission (the permission application) to bring a derivative claim (the derivative claim) on behalf of the estate of their grandmother, the late Elfrida Louise Chappell deceased (the deceased), on the basis that the executors of the deceased’s estate, Butterfield Trust (Bermuda) Ltd and Stephen Kempe (the executors), were unable to bring that claim due to alleged conflicts of interest. The derivative claim would allege that the ...
Laird v Simcock & ors [2022] WTLR 1351
Winter 2022 #189By his will, the late Robert Simcock created a trust over the sum of £200,000, under which his wife Catherine was to be the life tenant. Subject to that, the capital and income of that trust was to be held on the terms of a discretionary trust of residue also created by the will, the objects of which were Catherine, and Robert’s children and remoter issue.
Solicitors acting for the family determined that only a portion of Robert’s estate would benefit from Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR), with the consequence that, absent an appointment from t...
Laird v Simcock & ors (costs) [2022] WTLR 1365
Winter 2022 #189In an earlier judgment (p1351 of this edition), the court had dismissed the main claim seeking rectification of a deed of appointment made by the claimant and first defendant as executors and trustees of a will trust. The claimant’s position was that there should be no order as to costs, but the court should order that she be indemnified from the estate in respect of her costs. The claimant was neutral in respect of whether the court should order the defendants’ costs be paid out of the estate. The first defendant sought an order that the claimant pay her costs and submitted that the cla...
Re McEnroe [2022] WTLR 1377
Winter 2022 #189This was an application to admit an altered will to probate in its current condition. The testatrix (T) died in May 2017. Her last will and testament was a homemade pre-printed will executed in May 2005. The will had a number of alterations and the probate office refused to admit it to probate without further evidence. T’s sister therefore applied ex parte for the will to be admitted to probate, and for letters of administration with the will annexed. The will was witnessed but one of the witnesses had since died and the other was no longer of sound mind so could not give evidence about ...
Re Piedmont Trust and Riviera Trust [2022] WTLR 1403
Winter 2022 #189The trustees of two Jersey trusts known as the Piedmont Trust and the Riviera Trust made a Public Trustee v Cooper Category 2 type application for a ‘blessing’ of their decision to make distributions that would exhaust the funds of those trusts.
Detailed background to the trusts and of disputes that had previously arisen in relation to them was set out in Re Jasmine Trustees Ltd and Piedmont Trust [2015] (the 2015 judgment) and Re Piedmont Trust and Riviera Trust [2018] (the 2018 judgment).
The Piedmont Trust was a revocable discretionary trust established by deed in April ...
Pile v Pile [2022] WTLR 1445
Winter 2022 #189The parties, who were brothers, held two periodic tenancies as joint tenants: an agricultural tenancy and a commercial tenancy of land at Fir Tree Farm protected respectively under the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The appellant and a company of which he and his wife were sole directors and shareholders, F N Pile and Sons Ltd, entered into an agreement with the landlord (the agreement) under which he would serve a notice to quit the agricultural tenancy, the landlord would serve a notice to terminate the commercial tenancy in respect of which he agr...
Power v Bernard Hastie & Co Ltd & ors [2022] WTLR 1459
Winter 2022 #189The deceased had issued proceedings in 1991 against the defendants for personal injury arising from exposure to asbestos. Liability was admitted and in October 1993 the High Court made an order for damages (accompanied by a statement of agreed facts), which included a provisional damages order (PDO) under s32A Senior Courts Act 1981 in the following terms:
‘The Plaintiff do have leave to apply (without time limit) for further damages pursuant to Order 37 Rule 10 if he does develop the aforesaid conditions or diseases or any of them.’
(Ord.37, r.10 RSC has since been replace...
Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees SA v Chiddicks & ors [2022] WTLR 1475
Winter 2022 #189The late claimant was the settlor of eight family trusts of which Equity Trust (Jersey) Ltd was the original trustee. Two of the trusts, ZII and ZIII, both Jersey discretionary trusts, were relevant to the proceedings.
In 2006, Equity Trust retired as trustee and was replaced by Volaw Trustees Ltd. Equity Trust had the benefit of an indemnity. In 2008, a property crash led to the trusts becoming insolvent. In 2012, a company owned by ZII and in compulsory liquidation issued proceedings against its director and Equity Trust, which notified Volaw of its intention to rely on the inde...
Reeves v Drew & ors (costs) [2022] WTLR 1549
Winter 2022 #189In the main action, the claimant sought to prove a purported will dated 2014. The second and fourth defendants challenged the validity of the will on the grounds first of lack of knowledge and approval and secondly, by a late amendment, of undue influence. That amendment required a substantial amount of further evidence to be filed. In a judgment following trial ([2022] EWHC 159 (Ch), available in the WTLR web reports as WTLR(w) 2022-08) the judge found the 2014 will to be invalid for want of knowledge and approval, but dismissed the claim that it was procured by undue influence. The jud...