This Q&A assumes that limitation—this Q&A has not considered the inheritance tax implications of the proposed arrangement. Where a UK-resident and domiciled settlor reserves to themselves certain powers under a trust, it may have implications for the tax residence of the trust. In extreme cases, it may also result in the trust being held to be a sham. See Practice Notes: Management and control of trusts, Tax position of non-resident trusts, and Trust disputes—sham trusts. In order to avoid the trust being resident in the UK, not only must

This Q&A assumes that that the investment property which is already owned by the individual is a dwelling which is occupied by a tenant or tenants. Schedule 4ZA to the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) amends the rates of SDLT in FA 2003, s 55 where the chargeable transaction is a 'higher rates transaction' and, if it is, it attracts a 3% supplementary rate of SDLT. In the case of a transaction where there is only one purchaser, FA 2003, Sch 4ZA Pt 2 para 2(2), states a transaction is a ‘higher rates transaction’ if it falls

Where a life assurance policy is held subject to the terms of a trust, the life assurance company would usually endorse the policy document to indicate that the policy is held in trust, but the life company may not hold the original trust deed (or a copy). If the life assurance policy had been issued to trustees from outset, following the completion of a request as part of the application for the policy, the life assurance company's records would show the trustees as the policyholders. The life company's records should also show the names of

Gift of property An individual may give away property during their lifetime or on death. In either case, the gift may be made either outright or settled on trust. The individual may decide to give away the entire interest in the property or to retain an interest himself during his lifetime such that he becomes co-owner of the property along with the adult child/trustees of the trust for the adult child. In terms of lifetime gifts, you may find the following

How the rules against perpetuities and excessive accumulations apply to pilot trusts holding pension death benefits arising under a trust-based pension scheme is a complex topic and some areas of ambiguity exist depending on when the member joined the pension scheme and when the pilot trust was created. The decision of Goff J in Re Meadows Staff Pension Scheme Rules—broadly supported by the Privy Council decision in Baird v Baird—provides support for the view that, for the purposes of the perpetuity rule, the trust of a member's

Private client analysis: The Chancery Division held that the executors, who were removed for misconduct, must pay the applicant's costs and could not indemnify themselves from the estate. The court rejected the executors' attempt to use an exemption clause, emphasizing that costs follow the event in contested removal applications where executors act in self-interest rather than for the estate. Practical implications written by Toby Bishop, barrister of 5 Stone Buildings.

CPR PD 57AD provides for disclosure in the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales and the Business and Property Courts in Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle. It is substantially in the form of, and replaces, the pilot CPR PD 51U. It has been in force since 1 October 2022 in respect of both existing and new proceedings. It does not apply to certain types of cases, including those within a fixed costs regime or proceeding under CPR PD Part 8,

Local Government analysis: The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea obtained a pre-proceedings Norwich Pharmacal order for disclosure against a third party who had potentially innocently been caught up in wrongdoing, namely, unlawful subletting. The order required the online short term letting business AirBnB to disclose information concerning financial transactions associated with properties let to social housing tenants in two large blocks of flats. The Council was aware that some of its tenants were unlawfully subletting. The two blocks identified were in popular prime locations and contained a high proportion of key safes for individual properties which gave rise to the suspicion that short term subletting was taking place. The order sought was designed to enable the Council to identify the individual wrongdoers. AirBnB did not oppose the order sought but was unwilling to disclose the information without a court order. Written by Ian Peacock and Anneli Robins, barristers at 4–5 Gray’s Inn Square specialising in housing and local government law.

Insurance & Reinsurance analysis: In a rare decision on the operation of the Insurance Act 2015 (IA 2015), the High Court has confirmed that insurers were unable to avoid a liability policy, notwithstanding a misrepresentation by the policy holder regarding the terms on which it was trading. As a result, the claimant was entitled to assert the policy holder's rights of indemnity against the insurer under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (TP(RAI)A 2010). The decision contains useful guidance on the operation of conditions precedent in insurance policies, the duty of fair presentation under IA 2015 and the transparency requirements for contracting out of IA 2015. Written by Leah Alpren-Waterman, knowledge lawyer and Chris Neilson, partner at Mishcon de Reya LLP.

This Practice Note provides an overview of the role and operation of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) and the ranking of deposits protected by it in the waterfall of payments to creditors in the event of the insolvency of a relevant firm. For further information on the FSCS, see the following Practice Notes: • The Financial Services Compensation Scheme • Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS)—the qualifying conditions for compensation • Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS)—automatic assignment or subrogation of rights • Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS)—payment or rejection of compensation, and • Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS)—funding Role and operation of the FSCS What is the FSCS? The FSCS was established by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000) as an independent body which provides protection to customers in the event of a financial institution or financial services firm becoming unable, or likely to be unable, to pay claims against it (ie it is ‘in default’). It is a statutory fund of last resort and will

It is axiomatic that corporate insolvency can often lead to fraud claims. The Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) has ten sections with a title containing the word ‘fraud’ or ‘fraudulent’ (although when considering provisions like IA 1986, s 423 (transactions defrauding creditors), as this Practice Note will do below, it becomes apparent, at least in that instance, that ‘fraud’ in the modern legal sense of the word is not a necessary ingredient). Investigations into fraud following the insolvency of a company (or group of companies) can lead to many different forms including businesses that were set up solely as a vehicle of fraud or involved some form of group investment (which likely gave rise to an illegal collective investment scheme (CIS) that is in breach of, among others, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000). Irrespective of the form the fraud takes or the commercial sector which it covers (for example property development, manufacturing, general financial investment/advisory) insolvency practitioners (IPs) and creditors alike should act swiftly to understand

Insurance & Reinsurance analysis: Maeve Morrissey, trainee solicitor, Geoffrey Shreeve, legal director, and Paddy Partridge, solicitor apprentice, all at Kennedys LLP, summarise the court’s decision relating to late notification in Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd v Philip McCullough.