Re the Ta-Ming Wang Trust Cause no. FSD 0089 of 2010
January/February 2013 #126The first plaintiff (TMW) and members of his family are the beneficiaries under the Ta-Ming Wang Trust (the trust). The trust was intended to take advantage of a well-established tax-saving structure under which a foreign national such as TMW immigrating into Canada could obtain a five-year Canadian tax holiday on foreign source income earned by a non-resident company, owned by a non-resident trustee; ie on income by way of dividends paid by the company to the trust during the five-year tax holiday. It was established by a settlement dated 2 May 1996 made between TMW’s mother as settlor ...
Thomas v Jeffery & ors [2012] EWCA Civ 693
January/February 2013 #126The appellant (Richard) had successfully brought an application for reasonable financial provision from the estate of his late father. This had been initially expressed as a family provision and proprietary estoppel claim for some 50% of the deceased’s estate. The proprietary estoppel claim was dropped but the level of provision claimed under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 remained unaltered.
Richard provided little information on his financial position until directed to do so by the recorder at trial. This late disclosure proved the...
Vimercati v BV Trustco Ltd & ors [2012] EWHC 1410 (Ch)
January/February 2013 #126The claimant, Ambra (A), who had been a beneficiary under the MBV Trust, disputed the price obtained by BV Securities for its 20% shareholding in Air Italy in view of certain subsequent transactions involving Meridiana and Air Italy Holdings, a company in which the third defendant and protector of the trust (G) had an interest through his investment holding company. A also threatened breach of trust proceedings against the trustees. G and the fourth and fifth defendants, his wife and son, remained beneficiaries under the trust but A’s interest had been severed under a deed of appoi...
Bieber & ors v Teathers Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 1466
January/February 2013 #126The defendant (Teathers) promoted a series of unregulated collective investment schemes intended to take advantage of tax reliefs available on investments in TV productions. UK tax payers were entitled to write down 100% of any expenditure on a film or TV production certified as a British Qualifying Film. The schemes had not proved successful. Many of the productions were commercial failures and a number of them had not been certified as British Qualifying Films and were illegible for the tax relief that was the rationale behind the schemes. The claimants argued that money invested in th...