Mariner v HMRC [2013] UKFTT 657 (TC)
March 2014 #137Income tax;careless or negligent completion of income tax return;reliance on a professional advisor;reasonable excuse for careless or negligent completion of return.
Elizabeth Mariner (the appellant) instructed a professional tax advisor to complete and file her 2011 income tax return with HMRC. She was making losses on a let property. The return set these losses against her income from other sources. HMRC did not accept that the losses could be ‘set-off’ in this way. A penalty for underpaid tax as the result of the careless or negligent completion of a return was issu...
Marley v Rawlings & anr [2014] WTLR 299
March 2014 #137Mr Alfred Rawlings and his wife Maureen Rawlings instructed a solicitor to draft their wills in mirror form. Each spouse intended to leave his or her entire estate to the survivor of them, but provided that, should the other have predeceased or survived them for less than a month, their estates should be left to the appellant, who was not related to them but whom they treated as their son. Mr and Mrs Rawlings’ solicitor attended them on 17 May 1999 to enable a due execution of draft wills containing these provisions. By an oversight, their solicitor gave each spouse the other’s draft wil...
Petterson v Ross & ors [2013] EWHC 2724 (Ch)
March 2014 #137Mrs Ross, the testatrix, (T) had three adult children, the defendants: Diana (D), Lorenzo (L) and Gianni (G). T died on 13 July 2008 leaving a will dated 21 October 1988 (the will). At her death T held the following assets:
a) 13 Kensington Gardens, Ferryhill, County Durham (13KG) where D had lived until she moved in with her partner. At T’s death the property was worth £125,000 but subject to a mortgage with £50,401.52 outstanding. 13KG was bequeathed to D ‘free from any mortgage or legal charge to which the same may be subject at the date of my death’. The prope...Re Po; Jo v Go & ors [2013] EWHC 3932 (COP)
March 2014 #137PO was 88 years of age and lacked capacity to decide where she should live. She had four children, the applicant (JO), and the first, second and third respondents (GO, RO and MP). GO and RO were PO’s attorneys for property and affairs but no power of attorney or deputyship order was extant for welfare decisions.
Until the events giving rise to this application PO was habitually resident in England and Wales, living in her own property in Worcestershire with family and local authority assistance. However, in April 2012, GO moved PO to Scotland, initially to live with him but...
Rosenbaum (dec’d) v HMRC [2013] UKFTT 495 (TC)
March 2014 #137The appellant filed a paper tax return late and was liable to a penalty but appealed, arguing that it was merely intended to be a copy of a tax return subsequently filed online and in time. The respondent’s proposition was accepted that a subsequent online timely filing of a tax return by 31 January did not relieve a taxpayer, who had filed a valid paper tax return after 31 October, from a penalty. However, although the nature of the paper document which had been filed was in dispute and central to the issues between the parties, the respondent, on whom the burden of proof lay, fai...
Taylor (dec’d) v HMRC [2013] UKFTT 483 (TC)
March 2014 #137Mr J G Taylor was appointed as the executor of his father’s estate. HMRC wrote to Mr Taylor and asked him whether he wished to complete a full return or complete a form R27 to deal with his father’s final tax affairs. Mr Taylor chose to complete a form R27 and returned this. Correspondence between the parties ensued and three calculations were issued. Each was headed as a ‘calculation’. Mr Taylor was unhappy with the final calculation and appealed to the tribunal.
HMRC submitted that there was no appealable decision as the figures were calculations not for...
Pearce v Beverley [2013] EWHC 2627 (Ch)
January/February 2014 #136John Pearce (Mr Pearce) died on 23 July 2008. His daughter, the claimant, challenged the validity of a will purportedly made by Mr Pearce on 20 June 2007 (the will) on grounds of lack of capacity and want of knowledge and approval, and also challenged a number of lifetime transactions said to be procured by the defendant’s undue influence.
Mr Pearce’s second marriage broke down in 2004 and he consequently became lonely and depressed. His health was generally deteriorating. He suffered from partial kidney failure, which was first noted in March 2005, and by 2006 from s...
Sharma v Sharma & ors [2013] EWCA Civ 1287
January/February 2014 #136In April 2003 qualified dentist Anushika Sharma acquired her first dental practice. In January 2007 she acquired a second practice and in July 2007 she was provided with an opportunity to purchase a third. This opportunity prompted a family meeting to discuss Anushika’s expanding empire. Jagesh Sharma (Sunny), Keshbala Sharma and Rajesh Sharma (Anushika’s then husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law respectively) and Anushika were in attendance. During this meeting it was determined that a company (ADC Ltd) would be set up to purchase the third practice rather than Anushika doing this ...
Sylvester v Sylvester HC11C00458
January/February 2014 #136The deceased was born in Carriacou on 20 July 1925. She married her husband in 1953. He moved to London for work in the 1950s. She joined him in 1957. She died in London on 18 February 2008 aged 82, leaving a will dated 7 October 2007. The court had to decide whether she was domiciled in Carriacou or London at the date of her death in order to establish if it had jurisdiction to entertain a claim by the claimant pursuant to the Inheritance Act 1975 for reasonable financial provision out of the estate. The issue of domicile was ordered to be tried as a preliminary issue by an order of Mas...
Tchenguiz-Imerman v Imerman [2013] EWHC 3627
January/February 2014 #136Beneficiaries of a number of offshore discretionary trusts were joined as parties on their application to contested financial remedy proceedings. The court had made an order that these beneficiaries should disclose copies of documents provided to them for the purposes of an application that had been made to the Royal Court of Jersey (RCtJ) by the trustee of some of those trusts. The RCtJ had given the beneficiaries permission to make such disclosure if they were ordered to do so but expressed concerns about and invited the court not to require such disclosure [2012] (2) JLR 51.
Th...