Cowan v Foreman & ors [2019] WTLR 707
Autumn 2019 #176The appellant appealed from an order of Mostyn J by which he refused her permission pursuant to s4 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the 1975 Act) to bring an application out of time for reasonable financial provision out of the estate of her late husband (the deceased), who had died in 2016 leaving an estate of £29m. By his will the deceased left all his business assets qualifying for 100% business property relief on a discretionary trust (the business property trust) for a class of beneficiaries (the discretionary beneficiarie...
David Roberts Art Foundation Ltd v Riedweg [2019] WTLR 741
Autumn 2019 #176The claimant was a registered charitable company and the owner of 15a and 37 Camden High Street, London, SW1 7JE (the property). In or around November 2016 the claimant’s directors decided to sell the property and instructed Robert Irving Burns (RIB) to market it. Following a targeted marketing campaign, the defendant made a formal bid to buy the property for £8,000,000. Heads of terms were agreed on 22 December 2016.
On 10 January 2017, the claimant instructed Mr Bryn Williams of DTZ Tie Leung Ltd (trading as Cushman & Wakefield) (CW) to prepare a report. A report was provide...
Duke of Somerset v Fitzgerald & ors [2019] WTLR 771
Autumn 2019 #176Shortly after he came of age, the 19th Duke of Somerset, claimant in this action, established a Settled Land Act settlement dated 30 September 1971 (the settlement). Under the terms of the settlement, the claimant was tenant for life and one of the trustees. The other trustees were independent professional trustees and were joined as first and second defendants. The rest of the defendants were all of the adult beneficiaries interested under the trusts of the settlement (all of whom supported the application), there being no existing minor beneficiaries nor any lacking capacity. ...
Gaskin v Chorus Law Ltd & anr [2019] WTLR 785
Autumn 2019 #176The claimant ‘C’ and second defendant ‘D2’ were two of the children of the deceased, who appeared to have died intestate in 2012. They appointed a probate company ‘D1’ to administer the estate, who took a grant under a power of attorney from D2 in 2013. By 2016, the estate had not been administered and C believed D2 was living in the deceased’s property, so C issued a claim to remove Ds as administrators and for D2 to pay an occupation rent. D1 consented to be removed, but on terms that its fees would be paid. D2 agreed to D1 being removed, but not to her own removal or to payment of occ...
Group Seven Ltd & anr v Notable Services LLP & anr [2019] WTLR 803
Autumn 2019 #176These appeals arose from the a ‘brazen fraud’ by which Allseas Group SA was defrauded of €100 million. After the fraud took place, there was an attempt to launder the proceeds through the client account of a London firm of solicitors, Notable Services LLP, whose partners included Mr Landman. Police intervention secured the return of €88 million – the present proceedings concerned attempts to recover the remainder of this sum from Notable, Mr Landman, Mr Louanjli (a bank employee who provided information to Notable) and LLB Verwaltung, the bank who employed him (”the Bank”).
In add...
Howarth v HMRC [2019] WTLR 869
Autumn 2019 #176The Appellant was the settlor of a family trust based in Jersey which, following the merger of two companies, held shares in TeleWork Group plc. Ordinarily a capital gains tax charge would arise on the disposal of the shares but, on the basis of legal advice, it was suggested that this could be avoided if new trustees were appointed before the disposal in a jurisdiction which had no capital gains tax and a double taxation treaty with the UK. In June 2000 the Jersey trustees retired in favour of new trustees resident in Mauritius, in August 2000 the shares were sold in the course of a flo...
Kersner v HMRC [2019] WTLR 895
Autumn 2019 #176On an appeal against HMRC’s determination of liability to inheritance tax the appellant made a number of applications in the First-Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber), including an application to opt out of the complex track costs regime, and for disclosure of documents alleged to be relevant to the HMRC’s assessment that the appellant had not been domiciled in the UK, but in Israel, when shares had been transferred to her by her husband. The appellant contended that she was UK domiciled at the time of the gift and that the spousal exemption applied.
The tribunal wrote to the appellant on...
King & anr v The Benefice of Newburn in the Diocese of Newcastle & anr [2019] WTLR 905
Autumn 2019 #176The Appellants were the descendants of Edward Collingwood, who had conveyed a church and churchyard, for use as a chapel of ease for the parish of Newburn, to the Church Building Commissioners on 1 October 1837 (‘Conveyance’). As originally constructed, the church contained a burial vault or sepulchre lying below the central aisle of the nave. This had been expressly excepted and reserved to the grantor ‘… with full power for [the grantor and his heirs and assigns] to open such vault as aforesaid and use and repair the same at all reasonable times…’. The church had been closed for regula...
Lines v Wilcox & ors [2019] WTLR 927
Autumn 2019 #176The claimant was the administrator of the estate of Nancy Elizabeth Brock (deceased) who executed a ‘homemade’ will on 22 April 2005. The first defendant was appointed as executrix. The first, third, fourth and fifth defendants were the adult children of the deceased to whom she had bequeathed ‘all the money’ immediately following a reference to the price of £100,000 to be paid for the deceased’s house at 6 Mildfield Estate, Pontypool which she had agreed to sell to the first defendant and her husband, the second defendant. In the event, the defendant later transferred the house to the f...
MN v OP & ors [2019] WTLR 941
Autumn 2019 #176In a claim for the approval of an arrangement varying a trust under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958 (the 1958 Act), an application was made for an anonymity order restricting the naming of the parties and access to the court file relating to the claim and the publication of certain information. The judge dismissed the application but gave permission for an appeal. The appellant, who brought the claim, was settlor of a settlement (the settlement), which comprised very valuable assets divided into several funds, some of which were held on discretionary trusts and others ...