Coronavirus (COVID-19) (archived)

This subtopic contains materials, commentary and analysis on the implications of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic for Private Client work, together with links to related guidance and policy documents.

Key areas of practice impacted by coronavirus

The coronavirus pandemic poses many challenges for Private Client practitioners, from executing and witnessing Wills and lasting powers of attorneys (LPAs) when the key parties are in self-isolation, registering the death of a deceased individual and making funeral arrangements under the lock down, and continuing to protect vulnerable individuals under the protection of the Court of Protection who are, in the words of Mr Justice Hayden, in the eye of the storm. Contentious trusts and estates lawyers need to stay on top of the fast-moving changes in the civil courts’ processes and procedures necessitated by the pandemic.

There has been legislative help in a few areas; for example, the 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