Following the Act of Settlement in 1701, Scotland retained its own legal system and jurisdiction. Scottish law, which includes enforced heirship provisions, therefore relates to the estates of persons who die domiciled in Scotland. The process of probate in Scotland is known as confirmation and is broadly the same, though the procedure differs. It is possible for a person to have valid English and Scottish Wills, though a person who is domiciled in England and Wales is able to deal with property in the UK under one Will and there are reciprocal recognition provisions to enable a grant

In determining the answer to this question, it will be necessary to consider: • whether there is a contract of employment in place • whether there is a contractual right to ‘death in service’ benefit Contract of employment Once an unconditional offer of employment has been accepted, there will generally be a binding contract of employment, even though the employee has not yet started work (unless it is made clear in the offer that the contract will take effect on a different date). For more detailed information, see Practice Note: Offer of employment. An offer of employment can be made orally or in writing but it is advisable that it is in writing to remove uncertainty

We have assumed that the deceased’s father and his brother are brothers of the whole blood and that the deceased’s mother and her sister are sisters of the whole blood. We refer you to Practice Note: Intestacy—summary and the Intestacy—flowchart, which explain who is entitled

As set out in Practice Note: The type of grant needed, the right to the grant of letters of administration for a wholly intestate deceased’s estate is set out in the Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987 (NCPR 1987), SI 1987/2024, r 22(1). Practice Note also states that, if the person entitled to a grant survives

Succession to immovable property is governed by the law of the country where it is located and succession to moveable property will be governed by the law of the country where the owner is domiciled when they die. A form of forced heirship, known as ‘legal rights’, applies to an individual’s

The first step is to seek professional advice on the inheritance laws of Syria and how they apply to the client and their estate. If it is indeed the case that a Will or similar testamentary

Legal, as opposed to equitable, easements are not registrable under the Land Charges Act 1972 and a purchaser of a legal estate in unregistered land will take that estate subject to all other legal estates, rights and interests. Where the dominant land is registered, but the servient land (ie the unregistered land here) is not, there is no requirement to register it to

There is a distinction between ownership of a property as tenants in common and as joint tenants. Joint tenants have equal rights to the whole property. Each joint tenant has a 100% ‘share’ in the property. If one joint tenant dies, the property automatically goes to the other joint tenant (or other joint tenants). It is not open to a joint tenant to leave their ‘share’ to someone else in their Will because of course they do not have a share that is distinct and separate from that of the other joint tenants. The law treats

In answering this Q&A, it has been assumed that the individual has a valid easement created by deed but the plan attached to the deed showing the location of the tank is incorrect. In considering whether the disparity between the plan attached to the easement and the actual extent of the easement, invalidates the easement, the deed granting the easement will need to be construed objectively to ascertain the parties’ intentions ie: • is it the case that the parties intended the easement to be in the location as shown on the plan, or • is it the case that the plan is wrong and the parties always intended the easement to exist as it does It has been assumed that as the individual has been using the septic tank and drainage system as currently constituted,

As set out in Practice Note: Higher rates of SDLT on additional residential properties, the higher rates of SDLT have a number of different sets of requirements depending on how many interests in land are being acquired. As further explained in that Practice Note, under paras [5]–[6] under Schedule 4ZA of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003), there are special rules to deal with the an individual purchaser acquiring a major interest in two or more dwellings in one transaction. The rules for linked transactions under FA 2003, s 108 may treat the purchaser as if it had made one notifiable transaction, but it does not deem the transactions to be a single transaction. This is very clear from the way that the SDLT is calculated under FA 2003, s 55. Therefore,

This is a situation dealt with in the insolvency Ethics Code for Members, that all IPs are required to follow. The Ethics Code identifies five fundamental principles with which IPs are required to comply: • integrity • objectivity—conflict of interest or undue influence should not be allowed to override professional judgement • professional competence • confidentiality • professional behaviour—IPs should avoid action that discredits the profession The fundamental principles likely to be most affected by this situation are objectivity and professional behaviour. An IP should take care to identify threats to the fundamental principles that exist at the time of accepting an insolvency appointment. The Ethics Code categorises threats as follows: • self interest—as a result

Home rights or more properly matrimonial home rights are creatures of statute—the Matrimonial Homes Act 1967 as amended by the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996). The intention is to create a judicially protected right of occupation in favour of a spouse or civil partner who has no right of occupation by virtue of an estate, interest, contract or statute or only has an equitable interest in it. In most, but not all cases, it arises where the legal estate is vested solely in the husband, even if he holds on trust for himself and his wife. The wife has the protected rights but the husband does not because he does not need them. The right is: • not to be evicted