Futter and another (Appellants) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Respondent); Pitt and another (Appellants) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Respondent) – Supreme Court
Supreme Court, 9th May 2013
Category: trusts
Private Trusts and the Court of Protection – No. 5 Chambers
“The Court of Protection has jurisdiction over the property, financial affairs and personal welfare of people who lack mental capacity to make decisions for themselves. Among its various roles the Court is responsible for determining disputes as to the registration of enduring powers of attorney (“EPA”), and Lasting Powers of Attorney (‘LPA’), appointing new trustees, authorising certain gifts and making statutory wills.”
No. 5 Chambers, 4th February 2013
Source: www.no5.com
Day and another v Day – WLR Daily
Day and another v Day [2013] EWCA Civ 280; [2013] WLR (D) 129
“For the purposes of the doctrine of rectification in the case of a voluntary settlement it was the subjective intention of the settlor that was of relevance in determining whether the court should order rectification and an outward expression or objective communication of that intention was unnecessary in such a case.”
WLR Daily, 27th March 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Intestacy and Family Provision Claims on Death – Law Commission
“Government has accepted, in part, the recommendations we made in our report Intestacy and Family Provision Claims on Death.”
Intestacy and Family Provision Claims on Death
Law Commission, 21st March 2013
Source: www.lawcommission.justice.gov.uk
Challinor and ors v Juliet Bellis & Co and anr: Juliet Bellis & Co v Egan – WLR Daily
“Lack of writing did not necessarily mean that the circumstances of a case were not such as to give rise to a ‘Quistclose’ trust. Stipulation of an exclusive purpose for the loan was not the only circumstance of which the immediate recipient was cognisant and which negated an intention on the part of the payer, to pass away beneficial ownership so as to give rise to a resulting trust in favour of the payer.”
WLR Daily, 25th February 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Welcome relief? Nationwide v Davisons Solicitors and section 61 of Trustee Act 1925 – Hardwicke Chambers
“A topical debate is the extent to which solicitors acting for mortgage lenders (or more precisely, their professional indemnity insurers) should bear the consequences of mortgage fraud.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 10th January 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
Konica Minolta Business Solutions (UK) Ltd v Applegate – WLR Daily
Konica Minolta Business Solutions (UK) Ltd v Applegate: [2012] EWHC 3741 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 9
“When applying uniform accrual to ‘so much of any benefit’ by virtue of section 74(3) of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 one was being directed not merely to what one might call the top slice, the benefit which actually accrued at the higher rate, but that element of a benefit package which was the subject of the higher rate. In section 74(3) the ‘benefit’ referred to was the composite of the various benefits which made up long service benefit and if the exception applied it did with regard to the entirety of such a component.”
WLR Daily, 21st December 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Industry-Wide Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Co-ordinator Ltd v Industry-Wide Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Trustees Ltd – WLR Daily
“For the purposes of paragraph 3(7)(c) of schedule 5 to the Coal Industry Act 1994 the requirement that the rules of a new pension scheme be ‘no less advantageous’ than the previous scheme was not the same as a requirement that the rules of the new scheme be the same as the rules of the pre-existing scheme. The omission of a pro-rating provision from draft rule 33 of the Schedule to the Industry-Wide Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2973) was not a mistake in drafting and the rule fell to be construed in accordance with its express terms.”
WLR Daily, 20th December 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Pensions Ombudsman v EMC Europe Ltd and others – WLR Daily
Pensions Ombudsman v EMC Europe Ltd and others: [2012] EWHC 3508 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 382
“The Pensions Ombudsman had no jurisdiction to entertain a complaint by a scheme member to set aside a compromise agreement where successful determination of the complaint would adversely affect the rights of the parent company in circumstances where it was a necessary party to any claim to set aside the agreement but was not subject to the ombudsman’s jurisdiction.”
WLR Daily, 14th December 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Employee benefit trust payments to Rangers staff and players were not illegal, says tribunal – OUT-LAW.com
“The former Rangers Football Club did not act illegally when it used employee benefit trusts (EBTs) to distribute money to players and staff, a tribunal has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 22nd November 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
Baronet’s son awarded £5.60 in £2.5m family castle sale row – Daily Telegraph
“The son of a baronet embroiled in a bitter legal dispute with his father over the sale of the family’s £2 million estate was yesterday awarded just £5.60 a year by the High Court.”
Daily Telegraph, 21st November 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Russian businessman Vladimir Slutsker loses legal fight over London house – The Independent
“A ‘very wealthy’ Russian businessman today lost a legal fight with his ex-wife over the ownership of a house in London worth millions of pounds.”
The Independent, 17th September 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Hughes and others v Bourne and others – WLR Daily
Hughes and others v Bourne and others [2012] EWHC 2232 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 242
“The personal representatives’ power of appropriation under section 41(1) of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 was not confined to transactions of a contractual or quasi-contractual nature.”
WLR Daily, 27th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Religious no-go area for the courts with their “costly crudities” – UK Human Rights Blog
“Khaira v. Shergill [2012] EWCA Civ 893 – We have become used to the courts getting involved, more or less willingly, in religious issues, not least where religious freedoms conflict with legal rules which are said to be inconsistent with the exercise of those freedoms. But as Adam Wagner pointed out, in an earlier round of this litigation concerning two Sikh places of worship (Gurdwaras), the courts have developed rules stopping themselves from deciding certain cases, not least because the courts recognise they don’t know what they are doing once they get themselves immersed in issues of religious doctrine.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd July 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Shergill and others v Khaira and others – WLR daily
Shergill and others v Khaira and others: [2012] EWCA Civ 983; [2012] WLR (D) 214
“The courts will abstain from adjudicating on the truth, merits or sincerity of differences in religious doctrine or belief and on the correctness or accuracy of religious practice, custom or tradition.”
WLR daily, 17th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Cohabitation and Trusts of Land Update – Zenith Chambers
“The purpose of this article is to consider the law of constructive trusts following Jones v. Kernott [2011] UKSC 53, judgment given on 9th November 2011, insofar as it relates to the purchase of property primarily by cohabitants.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 27th June 2012
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
Philippe and others v Cameron and others – WLR Daily
Philippe and others v Cameron and others [2012] EWHC 1040 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 130
“The purpose of section 2(2) of the Charitable Trusts (Validation) Act 1954 was to prevent the Act being applied where an imperfect trust provision had already been recognised to be invalid and the invalidity acted upon.”
WLR Daily, 2nd May 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Earl of Cardigan loses paintings court battle – The Independent
“An aristocrat whose family name is famed for its link to the Charge of the Light Brigade today failed in a bid to prevent dozens of portraits of his ancestors being sold.”
The Independent, 20th April 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Gregg and another v Pigott and others – WLR Daily
Gregg and another v Pigott and others [2012] EWHC 732 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 104
“The phrase ‘statutory next of kin’ in an English settlement made in 1948 should be construed in such a way as to eliminate discrimination against adopted children by virtue of articles 8 and 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”
WLR Daily, 29th March 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in Administration) v CRC Credit Fund Ltd and Others (Financial Services Authority intervening) – WLR Daily
“The ‘client money pool’ to be distributed among former clients of Lehman Brothers’ London affiliate was not limited to money which had been placed in segregated client accounts, as required by the Financial Services Authority, but extended to identifiable client money which the company had failed to segregate and had retained in its own house accounts. The pool was to be distributed rateably among all clients who had a contractual entitlement to have money segregated and not just those in whose favour segregation had actually occurred.”
WLR Daily, 29th February 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
