Liability for own acts Personal representatives (PRs) may find themselves liable for their acts or omissions in respect of their dealings with: • third parties • beneficiaries of the deceased’s Will or on an intestacy • their co-personal representatives In the course of administration a PR is personally liable for: • performing their obligations under any contracts they enter into and in entering into a contract they are not permitted to limit their liability to the estate assets in their hands • any torts they commit • any loss to the estate resulting from their breach of duty (a devastavit) Generally the liabilities of an executor and administrator are subject to the same rules. Contracts As PRs are liable for the contracts they enter into and cannot limit their liability to assets in their hands they will be chargeable personally and can be sued in a personal capacity. This will be an action de bonis propriis (‘of their own goods’). Torts As with the position on contracts PRs are personally liable for any torts they commit.

Personal representatives’ duties The Administration of Estates Act 1925 (AEA 1925) states that personal representatives (PRs) must: • collect and get in the deceased’s estate, and • administer it according to the law PRs may be ordered by the court to provide an inventory of an estate and an account of their administration of the estate and they should exercise caution in resisting requests from beneficiaries for an account or otherwise risk significant costs being awarded against them. See News Analyses: Holding personal representatives to account—discharging an executor’s cardinal duty (Ali v Taj [2020] EWHC 213 (Fam)) and Indemnity costs following failed appeal against order for account and inventory (Ali v Taj). PRs also have a duty to pay the deceased’s debts ‘with due diligence’, having regard to the assets available to them from the estate which are properly applicable for that purpose. PRs should also consider any duties they may owe to potential beneficiaries of the deceased’s estate due to claims they may have had against the deceased. If they are not sure,

Personal representatives (PRs) should not generally find themselves liable for losses to the estate and it is possible to take steps to protect themselves from the consequences of a mistake. Equally, if they do find themselves liable to beneficiaries or the estate, there may be actions that can be taken to relieve them from that liability. For information about common notices and searches that PRs may wish to undertake prior to distributing an estate, see Practice Note: Personal representatives' protection—notices and searches. Unknown or missing beneficiaries A major problem that PRs may face, whether they were appointed by the deceased’s Will or are entitled to a grant on an intestacy, is a claim against them from a beneficiary who appears after the distribution of the estate and was unknown to the PRs before distribution. For instance, a gift to the deceased’s children may seem straightforward but the deceased may have had another child entirely unknown to the PRs and undiscoverable by standard enquiries (eg because none of the deceased’s family are aware of the child’s

A claim form must be served personally on a defendant in certain circumstances. What is meant by personal service depends on the type of defendant, as set out in CPR 6.5(3).

A worker can provide services in a number of different ways. The most common arrangement is an employment relationship, which broadly means that the employer has to operate PAYE on the amounts paid to the employee, comply with real time information (RTI) obligations, pay employer National Insurance contributions (NICs), and comply with numerous employment law requirements. The employee receives earnings net of income tax and employee NICs. A significant minority of individuals in the UK work as self-employed, supplying their services directly to their clients. Such individuals are responsible for reporting and accounting for their own income tax and NICs liabilities. It is ultimately a (sometimes complex) question of fact in each case whether a worker is self-employed or not. For more information on how this is considered, see Practice Note: Establishing employment status—from a tax and NICs perspective. A further type of arrangement is for the worker to provide services through an intermediary, such as a personal service company (PSC) or a partnership. There may be a number of commercial

Dispute Resolution analysis: Mr Justice Phillips in the Commercial Court held that a defendant was personally served with court proceedings in circumstances where he attempted to evade service by refusing to accept papers provided to him by process servers. This decision looks at the requirements to effect service under CPR 6.5 and provides some useful practical points for practitioners attempting personal service, or considering whether personal service has been validly effected.

What is personalised medicine Personalised medicine has existed for quite some time. Physicians have, to varying degrees, adapted treatments to individual patients based on information collected about them. But over the last decade and a half, the advent of systems biology has significantly widened the scope of personalised medicine, which in modern practice relies on acquiring as much data as possible about a given biological system. The goal of personalised medicine is to interpret collected datasets in a way that improves our understanding of a living system and its pathologies while enabling targeted treatment that is responsive to an individual patient or group of patients. Personalised medicine is often portrayed as medicine that is ‘custom-made’, in opposition to traditional medicine that has a ‘one size fits all’ character. Although many cell therapies, gene therapies and other advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are considered personalised medicines, the field is broader and includes all stages of medical procedure, beginning with diagnosis (often molecular diagnosis using biomarkers) and ending with targeted medicinal treatments.

Private Client analysis: The final Will of a testator suspected by the defendant of having a ‘personality disorder’, was declared valid by the High Court, following a trial on the written evidence. Although the parties had achieved a settlement at mediation, the court held that ‘the issue of testamentary capacity is ultimately a decision for the court and is not to be delegated to experts’. The court did not need to make findings as to whether the testator had a ‘personality disorder’, which in and of itself does not establish lack of testamentary capacity. It was held that, although the testator had a strong personality and ‘could be cruel and spiteful’, the suspicion of the court had not been excited, because although the testator’s decision to largely disinherit his children ‘may be considered unfair’, that decision was not irrational. The suspicion of the court was not excited, and the presumption of capacity was upheld. Written by Emma Fitzmaurice, senior associate solicitor at Freeths LLP.

1 Definitions [Customer’s Representatives • means the individual (or individuals) identified as such in [insert schedule];] Key Personnel • means the Supplier Personnel who are identified as the Supplier’s key personnel in relation to the Services in [insert schedule] and/or any Replacement; Losses • means all losses, claims, damages, liabilities, fines, interest, penalties, costs, charges, expenses, demands and [ reasonable] legal and other professional costs; Relevant Transfer • means a relevant transfer for the purposes of TUPE; Replacement • means a replacement or substitute for any Key Personnel as appointed from time to time in accordance with clause 3.5 or 3.6; Supplier Personnel • means all employees, directors, officers, staff, other workers, agents, contractors and consultants of the Supplier, its Affiliates and any of their subcontractors who are engaged in the performance of the Supplier’s obligations under this Agreement, including, for the avoidance of doubt, the Key Personnel; [Supplier’s Representatives • means the individual (or individuals) identified as such in [insert schedule];] TUPE • means the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 as amended, re-enacted or extended from time to time. 2 Supplier personnel 2.1 The Supplier shall ensure that it has sufficient Supplier Personnel to provide the Services and that all Supplier

means a person as defined in article 3(1)(25) of MAR.

Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court was asked by Shell UK (Shell) to continue three interim injunctions to restrain unlawful protest activity at a range of its sites. This was the latest in a series of renewal hearings following injunctions granted last year to restrain direct-action protest activities targeted at the oil industry and expressions of intent by campaign groups (including ‘Just Stop Oil’) to continue such activities. Mrs Justice Hill extended the three injunctions and granted Shell’s application for alternative service, amendment of the description of ‘Persons Unknown’ and third-party disclosure. She also gave helpful guidance as to the parameters of the CPR 40.9 jurisdiction which allows non-parties to apply to vary or discharge orders, the court’s approach to such applications at a hearing for the future continuation of an existing injunction against ‘Persons Unknown’ and the applicability of section 12(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) to these types of injunctions. Written by Myriam Stacey KC and Joel Semakula, barristers at Landmark Chambers.

Dispute Resolution analysis: A person unknown who refused to identify himself during proceedings for breach of copyright was debarred from challenging a bill of costs in detailed assessment proceedings unless he identified himself. Written by Phillip Patterson, barrister, Gatehouse Chambers.