Execution in Scotland

Executing documents

Private Client lawyers work on a large variety of matters, many of which involve written agreements that will need to be executed by the parties. This subtopic provides a resource for Scottish practitioners and for those practising in England and Wales involved in cross-border transactions as it summarises the law, guidance and practice relating to execution of documents in Scotland, including in particular:

  1. how valid execution is achieved by subscription

  2. the importance of witnesses in obtaining self-proving status for the execution

  3. the requirements of the Scottish property registers

  4. the delivery required for a document to be effective

  5. counterpart execution

  6. valid electronic execution and the advanced electronic signature

The Practice Note: Execution of documents under Scots law, summarises the law and practice relating to the execution of documents under Scots Law including which types of contracts or obligations must be recorded in writing and how valid execution

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

Market value, distributions and notional transactions—key SDLT lessons from Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC

Tax analysis: In Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC, the Court of Appeal considered the basis on which stamp duty land tax (SDLT) should be assessed and whether that resulted in SDLT being paid on the market value, the actual consideration paid, or on some other basis for a complex transaction within a corporate group. The taxpayer argued that the ‘Case 3’ exception under section 54(4) of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) applied, which would result in SDLT being charged on the actual consideration. HMRC argued that the exception did not apply, which would result in SDLT being paid on the market value of the property. Alternatively, HMRC argued that if the exception did apply then the anti-avoidance provisions at section 75A FA 2003 applied, potentially resulting in an even higher SDLT charge. The Court of Appeal held that although the Case 3 exception applied, the anti-avoidance provision in FA 2003, s 75A also applied. This resulted in SDLT being assessed on an aggregate amount that was even higher than the property's market value (although HMRC did not seek to increase its assessment beyond market value). Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. As explained by Jon Stevens, partner, and Rory Clarke, solicitor, at DWF Law LLP, this decision deals with the interaction of a number of complex SDLT provisions and clarifies the SDLT provisions relating to transfers to connected companies and the SDLT anti-avoidance provisions, with implications for corporate structuring and tax planning.

View Private Client by content type :

Popular documents