Probate actions

Probate actions—caveats

A caveat is a written notice that a person who wishes to prevent a grant being issued may enter in any registry or sub-registry.

Generally, a caveat is used if a person wishes to prevent a grant, because they dispute the validity of a Will or who should administer the estate.

By lodging a caveat, the caveator will be notified of an application for a grant and given the opportunity to object to the issue of a grant.

Once a caveat has been entered, the onus moves to those seeking to prove the Will to take action to remove the caveat, as it prevents a grant being issued until the caveat has been removed.

See Practice Note: Probate actions—caveats.

Probate actions—caveats Q&As

This Practice Note provides links to Q&As on caveats. These Q&As explain how the procedure works in practice. New Q&As are added on an ongoing basis.

See Practice Note: Probate actions—caveats Q&As.

Probate actions—citations

A citation is issued under the seal of the Principal Registry of the Family Division or a district probate registry. It contains the reason

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Private Client News

All in? Court confirms when a settlement is 'made' for the purposes of excluded property (Accuro Trust (Switzerland) SA v The Commissioners for HMRC)

Private Client analysis: This case considered the meaning of 'relevant property' under the settlements regime of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984) and, in particular, the time at which this definition is to be tested. The question arose as to whether the trustees of an offshore trust established by a non-UK domiciled settlor were subject to the UK settlements regime in respect of property added to the trust after the settlor became deemed domiciled in the UK, or whether they were exempt from such charges as the trust consisted solely of excluded property. The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that whether trust property is excluded property is based on the status of the trust at the time that it was established, not at the time that the property in question was added to the settlement. As a result, the trust in this case did consist solely of excluded property and no inheritance tax (IHT) charges arose as a result of either the ten-year anniversary or capital distributions. The FTT was also asked to consider whether their jurisdiction was appellate, or supervisory only. The FTT held that, while their jurisdiction was supervisory, the questions raised by the trustees were relevant in establishing whether HMRC had acted reasonably and that the outcome (ie that the paid IHT should be refunded and that no further IHT was due) would be the same in either case. Written by Katherine Willmott, senior associate solicitor at Foot Anstey LLP.

View Private Client by content type :

Popular documents