‘The first thing to say is that you should learn as much about holding and transacting with cryptocurrencies as you have time for.’
New Square Chambers, March 2020
Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk
‘The Will established a discretionary trust for the testatrix’s issue with a standard power to add any person as an additional beneficiary during the 80-year trust period and wide powers to appoint and apply capital and income. It directed that ‘in default of and subject to any exercise of’ those powers, the trustees should hold the trust fund (i) on expiry of the trust period for her issue (if any) then living and (ii) ‘if at any time the trusts declared by the foregoing provisions fail’ on trust for her nephews and nieces absolutely (subject to attaining age 18 or previously marrying). The testatrix had one child, who predeceased her. The question raised by the trustees was whether the power to add a beneficiary remained exercisable, or whether the trust fund was held exclusively for the nephews and nieces. The court held that upon the testatrix’s death the discretionary trusts had failed—that the power to add was not exercisable—and that the trust fund was accordingly held on trust for the class of nephews and nieces entitled under Clause 5(c)(iii) of the Will.’
Wilberforce Chambers, 12th March 2020
Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk
‘Where a client owns or plans on owning a property jointly with someone else, there are a number of things that should be considered.’
Family Law, 11th March 2020
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘A naturalist who wanted to rewild the family farm has lost a 15-year legal battle with his brother after a judge ruled he cannot prevent the sale.’
Daily Telegraph, 23rd January 2020
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Earlier this year the conflicting authorities of Bhusate v Patel [2019] EWHC 470 (Ch) and Cowan v Foreman and others [2019] EWHC 349 (Fam) cast doubt on the use of standstill agreements in respect of claims intended to be brought under section 2 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (“the Act”). Following the determination of the appeal in the latter case that uncertainty has to a large extent been resolved.’
Becket Chambers, 4th December 2019
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court, in the recent decision of Routier v Revenue and Customs Commissioners (No 2) [2019] UKSC 43, [2019] 3 WLR 757, has provided valuable guidance as to the scope of s. 23 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (which exempts gifts to charities from IHT). The case is a welcome decision for private clients and their estate planners wishing to support international charitable causes while simultaneously benefitting from reduced liability to inheritance tax.’
Wilberforce Chambers, 8th November 2019
Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk
‘The First-tier Tribunal (Charity) has dismissed the disqualification appeal from a former church pastor who was banned from being a charity trustee for ten years after the Charity Commission concluded, inter alia, that he had used charitable funds for foreign trips that did not appear to be for charitable purposes.’
Law & Religion UK, 14th October 2019
Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com
‘For many common lawyers – certainly me – trusts and equity seem exotic things. At one point, I supposed the closest I would get to equity in action was by reading Bleak House, which in length and majesty even rivals some of the equity textbooks. But in this (as many other things) I was proved wrong. One cannot properly understand the law of assignment – a bedrock of the commercial construction lawyer’s practice – without comprehending equitable assignment. And it is at the outer fringes of assignment where one may bump – or even lapse – into trusts.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 9th October 2019
‘In a decision handed down on 30th July 2019, the Court of Appeal have overturned a controversial first instance decision. Mostyn J had refused permission to bring a claim under s4 Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The substance of the claim under the Act related to whether a beneficial interest under a discretionary trust, rather than outright provision, failed to make reasonable provision for a spouse. The first instance decision created a stir because, among other findings, Mostyn J made obiter comments that it was not appropriate for parties to enter into ‘stand still agreements’ as an attempt to extend the 6-month time limit for bringing claims under the Act whilst negotiations were underway.’
No. 5 Chambers, 7th August 2019
Source: www.no5.com
‘The first respondent (“Koza Ltd”) was a private company incorporated in England in March 2014. Koza Ltd was a wholly owned subsidiary of the sixth appellant (“Koza Altin”), a publicly listed company incorporated in Turkey and part of a group of Turkish companies known as the Koza Ipek Group (“the Group”). The Group was formerly controlled by the second respondent (“Mr Ipek”).’
Hardwicke Chambers, 22nd August 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The High Court has backed international firm Taylor Wessing over its refusal to disclose privileged information to the beneficiary of a Bahamian trust. Taylor Wessing was acting for the trustee of the Glennfinnan Settlement when a beneficiary of the trust requested personal data about parties to litigation in the Bahamas.’
Law Society's Gazette, 23rd May 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Edward Floyd, a partner at Penningtons Manches in London, writes that there has been a fascinating twist in the tale of the long running, bitterly contested litigation, Quan v Bray (dubbed the “Chinese tigers” case) after the wife’s financial claims on divorce came before Mr Justice Mostyn in December 2018. The case has spanned six years and legal fees of £7 million have been incurred, attracting widespread tabloid interest.’
Family Law, 6th February 2019
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The recent decision of the Upper Tribunal in Densham v Charity Commission [2018] UKUT 0402, in which the Charity Commission made detailed legal submissions, will be of interest to all trust law practitioners as well as those working with local authorities.’
Law Society's Gazette, 28th January 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Antonia Barker, senior associate at Vardags, who acted for the wife in this case, comments on Quan v Bray, which involved long-running financial remedy proceedings in which the court made findings of gross litigation misconduct and that the husband had earning capacity that could be inferred.’
Family Law, 25th January 2019
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘A woman awarded £500,000 after being left with severe physical and mental disabilities is homeless after her mother was barred from buying them a home with the money.’
BBC News, 14th January 2018
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In late 2015, the Government introduced an additional nil rate band for inheritance tax purposes applying where a deceased person’s interest in their residence is “closely inherited” by their children and other descendants, known as the residential nil rate band (“RNRB”). The objective was to meet the criticism that the estates of persons, who are by no means wealthy, were being dragged into the inheritance tax net by virtue only of the historic rise in residential property prices.’
Radcliffe Chambers, 5th December 2018
Source: www.radcliffechambers.com
‘The appeal concerned whether the Scheme had been effectively amended to include a trustee power to award discretionary pension increases and whether the subsequent exercise of that power was valid.’
Radcliffe Chambers, 5th July 2018
Source: www.radcliffechambers.com
‘Tanfield barristers Marc Glover and Chloe Sheridan successfully represented the Claimants in a High Court dispute over East Thurrock United Football Club. In a judgment handed down on 25th July 2018, the Court dismissed the defendant’s and additional parties’ claims to a share in the land used by the Football Club, claimed to be worth £10 million.’
Tanfield Chambers, 6th August 2018
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘Company directors were said to be responsible for assets despite their use of corporate vehicles, the Supreme Court has ruled (12-page / 157KB PDF). The ruling means that a six year limitation period stopping liquidators taking legal action against the directors does not apply. This case will impact future misfeasance actions. Director and officer indemnity insurers should take note of this decision as it confirms that the English courts are unwilling to accept the six-year limitation defence for actions against directors following the disposal of company assets in breach of fiduciary duty for economic gain.’
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd March 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025