Whether or not the executor in this scenario has intermeddled in the estate will depend on the specific circumstances of the matter. See Practice Note: Intermeddling in an estate. In particular, it may follow from the following commentary that simply having applied to be administrator in the estate by a person who later finds out that they are appointed as executor may not of itself amount to intermeddling: ‘The mere act by an executor of being sworn as such, and afterwards changing his mind before probate has issued, is not of itself regarded as intermeddling.’. See Commentary: Where renunciation invalid. Executor having intermeddled: Tristram and Coote’s Probate Practice [15.47]. In any case, as it has come

A disabled person’s trust is a trust which benefits from special inheritance tax (IHT) treatment. To benefit from the special treatment certain qualifying conditions must be met. To qualify, the trust itself must be one of the types allowed by section 89 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984) and subsequent amendments to IHTA 1984 and there must be a qualifying disabled beneficiary. IHTA 1984, s 89(4A) and Schedule 1A to the Finance Act 2005 (FA 2005) set out criteria a trust beneficiary must meet to qualify as a disabled person for the purposes of IHTA 1984. To qualify

Practice Note: Suitability grounds for refusal and cancellation of permission notes that, under the Immigration Rules, Part 9, para 320(7B): ‘Unless an exemption applies, or a relevant re-entry ban time period has elapsed, an application made under a category within Parts 2‒8, or Appendix Armed Forces, must be refused where a person has previously breached UK immigration law by: • overstaying, unless for a period of 90 days or less (where the overstaying began before 6 April 2017) or 30 days or less (where the overstaying began on or after 6 April 2017) and, in either case, they left the UK voluntarily and not at public expense […] Where any of the above circumstances apply, any further application to re-enter the UK will be refused until the following re-entry ban time period has elapsed: • one year, if

Once a non-British or Irish national with indefinite leave to remain (ILR) is granted British citizenship they will then have the right of abode in the UK and their ILR will fall away. Section 2(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 (IA 1971) states that a person has the right of abode in the UK if they are a British citizen. Section 1 of IA 1971 provides that ‘All those who are in this Act expressed to have the right of abode in the United Kingdom shall be free to live in, and to come and go into and from, the United Kingdom without let or hindrance…’ and that the Immigration Rules regulate the administration of the Act for regulating the entry into and stay in the UK for persons without the right of abode. As

You have asked: If a person has the benefit of an easement within a freehold title, what prevents them from granting the benefit of that right in a lease? There is no reason why the proprietor of a freehold title which has the benefit of an easement cannot pass on the benefit of

The Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) category is not currently covered on Lexis+® UK Immigration, but is earmarked for future development. See the following Home Office guidance documents for more information. In relation to an application for endorsement from a Designated Competent Body (‘Stage 1’ of the application process), the current Policy Guidance for Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent), at para 9, states that: ‘As stage 1 is not an immigration application, it will not affect any current leave you hold in any way. If you are granted an endorsement by a Designated Competent Body, you must then apply for Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) leave to enter or remain. This is stage 2 of the process, which is undertaken solely by the Home Office and assesses only immigration matters.’ In

As mentioned in Practice Note: IHT—the charge on death, the IHT charge on death extends to the value of a person's estate immediately before their death (see section 4(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984)). For the purposes of the IHT legislation a person's estate is in general the aggregate of all the property to which they are beneficially entitled (see IHTA 1984, s 5(1)), less their liabilities (see IHTA 1984, s 5(3)). Liabilities are deductible so far as incurred for consideration in money or money's worth or imposed by law (see IHTA 1984, s 162) and provided they are discharged on or after death out of the estate in money or money's worth (see IHTA 1984, s 175A), unless there is a right of reimbursement reasonably likely to be obtained. See

Where a person who is a British citizen and also a citizen of an EU Member State is entering the UK, their relevant passport for the purposes of entry should be their British passport. This is in order to show that they have the right of abode in the UK as a British citizen. See Q&A: What is the law that governs the entry of British citizens to the UK and in particular, what documentation they must provide to an immigration officer as evidence of their nationality? Similar considerations are likely to pertain as regards their entry to the EU Member State of which they are a citizen, depending on the law of that state. As regards entry to another EU Member State, they will

If the deceased died intestate, Parts III and IV of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 (AEA 1925) apply to: • all the movable property of the deceased wherever situated, provided the intestate was domiciled in England and Wales, and • all immovable property of the deceased in England or Wales, whether the deceased was domiciled here or elsewhere The succession to a deceased person’s residuary estate on intestacy depends on the value of the estate and on the classes of family relations who have survived the deceased. Where the spouse or civil partner of the deceased survived, then he or she will receive the statutory legacy (of £250,000 where the deceased also left ‘issue’). AEA 1925, s 46 sets out the order of entitlement and provides that the deceased’s issue will either share one half of the residue with the surviving spouse or civil partner

A trust is created where one or more persons (the trustees) are under an obligation to hold property in their name or under their control (the trust fund) and to administer that property in accordance with the provisions of the trust, which can be enforced by the beneficiaries for the interests of

As was noted in Phonographic Performance Ltd v Ellis (t/a Bla Bla Bar), the power to imprison for contempt of court arises out of the inherent jurisdiction of the Court, but is subject to the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (CCA 1981). By virtue of CCA 1981, s 14 a sentence of imprisonment may be imposed for contempt of court, but for no more than two years (see also Palmer v Tsai). This is limited to a period of one month for committal ordered by the inferior courts. Further, specific statutory powers may limit the period further. The CCA 1981 does not expressly make contempt of court a criminal offence. Whether the contempt is a criminal offence is a question of whether the form of contempt is a civil or criminal contempt. As was noted in

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) introduced a new test for mental capacity, which should be the starting point to determine a person’s capacity. It codifies the common law and does not expressly overrule it. MCA 2005 provides that: • it is assumed that a person has capacity until the contrary is proved (reflecting the existing common law presumption) • capacity is ‘decision-specific’ and is assessed according to each decision that needs to be taken, and • the definition of capacity does not replace the existing common law tests A party lacks the capacity to conduct