Legg v Burton [2017] WTLR 1017
Autumn 2017 #169The testatrix had two daughters, the first and second claimants. In July 2000, the testatrix and her husband made wills in favour of the survivor, and subject to that, in favour of the claimants in equal shares.
The husband died in May 2001. Between 2001 and 2004, the testatrix made 13 further wills. These progressively favoured the defendants (who were two of the grandsons of the testatrix and the partner of one of them), at the expense of the claimants. The last of these wills was made on 12 December 2014, when she made a further will under which the claimants took a legacy of £...
Martin v Williams [2017] WTLR 1041
Autumn 2017 #169This was an appeal against a decision of the County Court ([2016] WTLR 1075) to make reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 for Mrs Joy Williams from the estate of her deceased partner Norman Martin. Under the terms of Mr Martin’s last will his entire estate passed to Mrs Maureen Martin, Mr Martin’s wife, from whom he was separated, but to whom he remained married until the date of his death. Mr and Mrs Martin had not divorced but they had made an informal arrangement regarding their separation.
HHJ Gerald made an order ...
Nahajec v Fowle [2017] WTLR 1071
Autumn 2017 #169By a will dated 7 July 2015 Stanley Nahajec (‘deceased’) left the whole of his estate valued at £265,710 to the defendant whom he appointed as sole executor. The deceased died on 19 July 2015 and a grant of probate to the defendant was issued on 15 October 2015. The claimant, who was one of three adult children of the deceased, brought a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (‘Act’) on 12 April 2016. One of her half siblings, Mark Nahajec, similarly made a claim under the act which was settled by a payment of £22,000 though his circumstances differed ...
Rangers v Advocate General for Scotland [2017] WTLR 1093
Autumn 2017 #169The appeal concerned a tax avoidance scheme by which employers paid remuneration to their employees through an employees’ remuneration trust in the hope that the scheme would avoid liability to income tax and Class 1 national insurance contributions. The question on appeal was whether an employee’s remuneration was taxable as their emoluments or earnings when it was paid to a third party in circumstances in which the employee had no prior entitlement to receive it himself or herself.
The employing companies, including RFC, operated the tax avoidance scheme in the tax years between...
Routier & anr v HMRC [2017] WTLR 1119
Autumn 2017 #169The appeal concerned the restriction (the Restriction) imposed by s23 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA), as interpreted by the Court of Appeal in an earlier hearing of the appeal, on IHT relief for legacies and gifts to charities, to legacies and gifts to UK charities subject to the supervision of the UK courts. The question was whether the Restriction violated the EU law principle of freedom of movement of capital so as not to be enforceable in relation to a legacy of an estate with assets situate in the UK to a Jersey charity.
There were three sub-issues:
(1) Was Jerse...The Public Guardian’s Severance Applications [2017] WTLR 1145
Autumn 2017 #169The Public Guardian brought various consolidated applications for severance under para 11((3) of Schedule 1 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (the MCA 2005) in respect of various lasting powers of attorney which were potentially unlawful or ineffective by reason of the operation of s9 MCA 2005, which provides that an LPA is not created unless it is made and registered in accordance with Schedule 1 of para 19.
Held: 1) As to MC, the donor at s7 of the LPA had instructed that ‘Any financial decisions up to the value of £150.00 can be made independently by my attorneys. However any...Vigne v HMRC [2017] WTLR 1193
Autumn 2017 #169The deceased died on 29 May 2012. At the time she was the sole beneficial owner of 30 acres of land (the land) used for carrying out a livery business. The business provided less than ‘part livery’ (ie day-to-day care being shared between the livery operator and horse owner) but more than ‘DIY Livery’ (ie a right to reside in a field plus a stable). For example the business provided worming products for the horses and hay feed during winter months.
The deceased’s personal representatives claimed BPR on the ground that the land was ‘relevant busi...
Revell v HMRC [2016] UKFTT 97 (TC)
Summer 2017 #168On 10 December 2014, HMRC purported to close an enquiry into the appellant’s self-assessment for the year 2008/2009 by making amendments to the return so as to increase the tax due for that year to £16,518.60. The appellant appealed this decision principally on the basis that HMRC had failed properly to serve on him a request to file a self-assessment return.
HMRC had carried out a reconciliation of the appellant’s PAYE records showing a significant underpayment. HMRC sent a self-assessment return to what it thought was the appellant’s last known address. He did ...
Trilogy Management Ltd v Harcus Sinclair [2016] EWHC 170 (Ch)
Summer 2017 #168This was an application by the defendant firm of solicitors (D) for the particulars of claim and reply to be struck out on the ground that they disclose no answer to the limitation defence or summary judgment dismissing the entirety of the claim on the basis that the claimant (C) has no real prospect of success because the claim is statute barred.
The proceedings arose out of a family dispute concerning a charitable trust (F) established by the deceased (OM). By his will OM left his shares in a Jersey investment company (JY) and in the trustee company of F (YT) to the executors an...
Twin Benefits v Meek [2017] EWHC 177 (Ch)
Summer 2017 #168This was an application by the claimant for an order for disclosure against a non-party under CPR r.31.17. The underlying action concerned a claim by the assignee of rights from the twin minor children of the first defendant (‘the twins’) concerning a compromise of earlier proceedings (‘the compromise’). The claimant alleged that neither the twins nor their mother was consulted about the compromise, and the compromise did not properly take account of the twins’ interests.
In the late 1990s the first defendant established an employee benefit trust (&#...