This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) the necessity of a DOLs order where all parties with parental responsibility consent (J (through his Children's Guardian) v Bath and North East Somerset Council); (2) the OPG updates Mental Capacity Act 2005 guidance with new contact details; (3) the FTT cautions on time-wasting use of AI while upholding an HMRC discovery assessment (Zzaman v HMRC); (4) a decision on the suitability of summary judgment for a claim concerning the imposition of a secret trust (Lorenz v Caruana); (5) the FTT upholds a transfer of assets abroad charge in respect of receipt of rent-free accommodation (Moran v HMRC); (6) the Master of the Rolls delivers a speech on AI and Article 6 ECHR; and (7) a free webinar: Court of Protection update.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) Budget 2026; (2) a decision of the Business and Property Division which held that an unattested signature defeated a power of attorney used to move a private fund partnership to the Cayman Islands (3Kings Holdings v TCF 1 GP); (3) analysis of Irwin Mitchell Trust Corporation v PW (by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor), which considers whether claims arising from the voidable appointment of an asset manager by a conflicted corporate Deputy should be waived; (4) the EU Parliament approves rules to improve legal protection for vulnerable adults; (5) Langley v Langley, in which the Court held that concerns about the perceived independence of a proposed administrator justified the appointment of another person in their place; and (6) HMRC’s new guidance on legal professional privilege and anti-avoidance powers.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) The government publishes a call for evidence as part of the independent review of the loan charge; (2) Analysis of Rukhadze v Recovery Partners GP Ltd, a landmark decision of the Supreme Court on the liability of trustees and other fiduciaries to account for unauthorised profits; (3) Updated HMRC interest rates for late and early payments; (4) The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator’s announcement of a consultation for an updated charity accounting framework, and (5) DE and another v TE and another (by their Children's Guardian), a decision on the recognition of an overseas adoption.

This week’s edition of Private Client weekly highlights includes: (1) the case of David Peace, in which the High Court confirmed that the beneficiaries could agree to waive the forfeiture rule following Mr Peace’s assisted death; (2) the Court of Protection case of Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council v A, in which the court found that an elderly dementia sufferer was moved from Spain to Wales unlawfully and continued to have habitual residence in Spain; (3) Mudan v Revenue and Customs Commissioners, in which the Court of Appeal confirmed the FTT and UT decisions that property requiring significant renovations should still be treated as residential property for SDLT purposes; (4) Khatun v Hasan, in which the Chancery Division held that the defendants failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that the disputed Will was genuine; and (5) Haworth v HMRC, in which The Court of Appeal dismissed the taxpayers’ appeal and upheld the decisions of the FTT and UT that the place of effective management of certain family trusts was in the UK, and not Mauritius.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) Re PG, Serious Medical Treatment, which contains analysis of the complex and challenging clinical issues surrounding the investigation and treatment of cancer where P lacks or may lack capacity; (2) The direct payment scheme for IHT has been extended to investment providers; (3) Little v Olympian Homes Ltd in which the court considered whether email correspondence or the party’s conduct gave rise to a waiver of a party’s entitlement to contractual interest; (4) Taylor v Savik, an insolvency case which considered, inter alia, the doctrine of sham and the law relating to resulting trusts; (5) Marcus v Marcus, in which the court held that a stepchild could be regarded as a child of the settlor and therefore be included in the class of beneficiaries, and (6) D’Aloia v Persons Unknown Category A and others, in which the stablecoin Tether was held to be property in a landmark judgment that considers the tracing of cryptoassets.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) a Court of Protection testamentary capacity decision is held not to be binding in a dispute about the validity of a Will (Croll v The Estate of Margaret Mary Thorpe Deceased); (2) the ATT responds to HMRC’s consultation on proposals to recover lower-value tax debts by automated monthly deductions from taxpayers’ UK bank or building society accounts; (3) the FTT holds that a loan charge applied despite an attempted repayment by the taxpayer through a tax avoidance scheme (Grand Smile Design Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners); (4) HMRC publishes a second technical note on the IHT treatment of pensions ahead of the April 2027 changes; (5) the Family Court considers the parental status of non-genetic, non-gestational parents (AR v BM); and (6) the decision of the NSW Court of Appeal which has found the Australian Tax Commissioner liable for knowing receipt of trust property (Commonwealth of Australia v Kupang Resources Pty Ltd).

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) analysis of Patel v O’Sullivan, a decision which confirms the evidential weight required to rebut allegations of want of knowledge and approval and undue influence in probate disputes; (2) Godwin v Godwin, which concerned a dispute over the disposal of the deceased’s remains; (3) HMRC introduces a new dedicated trusts enquiries helpline; (4) the Charity Commission has updated its conflicts of interest guidance (CC29); (5) the Information Commissioner’s Office updates its direct marketing guidance for charitable purposes soft opt-in provision; (6) Madsen v HMRC, in which the FTT found that a discovery assessment was invalid, blocking recovery of SDLT from an ineffective avoidance scheme; (7) analysis of HMRC v Burlington Loan Management DAC, where the Court of Appeal confirmed that the anti-abuse provision in UK-Ireland double tax treaty did not apply to deny UK withholding exemption; and (8) Aabar S.À.R.L. v Glencore Plc, which confirms that intra-client documents can attract legal advice privilege.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) MacPherson v Sunderland City Council, in which the Court of Appeal clarified the proper method for assessing mental capacity in litigation; (2) XY withdrawal of treatment, a decision concerning the relevance of P’s religion and belief in prolonged disorder of consciousness cases; (3) the Hansard Society highlights concerns over delegated powers in the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill; (4) Demetriou v Revenue and Customs Commissioners, which held that a fisheries business did not qualify for business property relief; (5) Bryan Robson Ltd v HMRC, in which the FTT decided that IR35 does not apply to consideration attributable to the exploitation of image rights; (6) further analysis of the Supreme Court decision in Hirachand; and (7) Private Client launches new Regulatory compliance for Private Client topic.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) Patricia (by Her Accredited Legal Representative) v Cygnet Healthcare Ltd in which the Court of Protection held that section 28 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 prevented the Court of Protection from making any best interests decisions regarding treatment regulated by Part 4 of the Mental Health Act 1983; (2) the FTT decides entitlement to business asset disposal relief formed part of the subject matter of closure notice in Scott Knight v HMRC; (3) Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Candy, where the UT held that SDLT overpayment relief was available despite the requirement to file a return amendment; (4) the Ministry of Justice launches a consultation on reforming weddings law in England and Wales; (5) TR v ST which concerned the disclosure of offshore trust documents in ongoing financial remedy proceedings; (6) the Crown Court clarifies sanctions under the Russia sanctions regime in R v Hauser & Wirth Gallery Ltd; and (7) the Information Commissioner’s Office updates its subject access request guide to reflect the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) the Justice Committee’s key findings in its enquiry into Probate Service delays; (2) a new HMRC factsheet about corresponding with HMRC electronically using email or Dropbox; (3) L v HMRC, in which the First-tier Tax Tribunal granted an application by the taxpayer for the hearing of her appeal to be held in private and for the judgment to be published in anonymised form; (4) Jersey reviews the Revenue Rule, upholds it but qualifies it; (5) Jersey States Assembly approves assisted dying; (6) the Finance (No 2) Act 2024 receives Royal Assent, and (7) the making of REUL(RR)A Regulations regarding the interpretation of assimilated law and related court processes.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) NHS Trust v DT, in which the Court of Protection held that the choice of location for brain-stem death testing is a best interests decision; (2) Canarapen v Gauchenot, in which the court held that the effective delivery of a deed of variation requires objective evidence of intention to be bound; (3) STEP and Association of Lifetime Lawyers call for IHT reform on infected blood compensation; (4) the Information Commissioner’s Office launches a consultation on charitable purpose soft opt-in rules for fundraising; (5) the Justice Committee publishes a letter seeking clarification from the government on litigation authorisation following Mazur ruling; (6) CIOT publishes technical news update on small profits rate and non-resident companies; and (7) the OECD proposes international exchange of information on property owners.

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) government publishes HMRC’s Transformation Roadmap; (2) application granted to seal Will of former IRA agent (Johnson v His Majesty’s Attorney-General); (3) Trust deed held to be a transaction to defraud creditors (Khawaja v Stefanova); (4) notice of enquiry to nominated partner held to be valid (Sovereign Corporate Ltd (as the Nominated Partner of Coronation Film Partners Llp) v HMRC); and (5) Successful Inheritance Act claim by adult child excluded from parent’s Will (Isaacs v Green (as personal representative of the Estate of Sybil Rachael Isaacs deceased)).