This Practice Note explains the concept of parental responsibility for children under section 3 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989). It sets out what is included in the scope of parental responsibility and how the courts have interpreted this concept in relation to, eg education, religious upbringing and consent to medical treatment, changing a child’s surname and removal of a child from the jurisdiction. Definition Parental responsibility is concerned with the care and upbringing of a child until they grow up. Under ChA 1989 parental responsibility means all the rights, duties, powers, responsibility and authority that, by law, a parent has in relation to their child and their child's property. It also includes the rights, powers and duties that a guardian of the child's estate (appointed before ChA 1989 came into force) had in relation to the child's property. Those rights include the right to receive or recover in the guardian's own name, for the benefit of the child, property of whatever description and wherever situated that the child is entitled to receive

Commercial analysis: The case involved a successful application for summary judgment by the claimant for sums owed to it in respect of a crude oil cargo it had delivered to the defendant. The defendant raised various defences, all of which were unsuccessful, serving as a useful reminder that, if appropriate, an application for summary judgment can be considered even in fairly complex commercial transactions. The case contains an important ruling on sanctions clauses and useful guidance on the interpretation and applicability of force majeure clauses. Written by Lynne Counsell, barrister at Addington Chambers.

Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court has refused to enforce part of a multi-million dollar US judgment because it fell within the definition of ‘multiple damages’ under section 5 of the Protection of Trading Interests Act 1980 (PTIA 1980). This decision clarifies the meaning of multiple damages and the scope of the prohibition under the legislation, which up until now has been subject to only a ‘sprinkling’ of authority. It also provides useful guidance on the approach the court will take to enforcing foreign judgments containing elements of both compensatory and punitive damages. Finally, the judgment clarifies the impact of any underlying unenforceability on claims to enforce awards for interest and legal costs. Written by Harriet Campbell, senior knowledge lawyer at Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP.

What is a fixed interest trust/interest in possession for trust law purposes? The interest in property of a beneficiary interested under a trust may be a fixed interest, entitling the beneficiary to income and/or capital, or it may be dependent on the exercise by the trustees (or some other donee of a power) of a discretionary power to benefit them, from which they obtain a fixed (limited or absolute) interest in the relevant property. It is important to remember that the trust law and tax law definitions of trust interests vary, so that an interest in possession (IIP) for trust law purposes is not necessarily a qualifying IIP (QIIP) for inheritance tax (IHT) purposes. Where the trust is governed by a law other than that of England & Wales, the interpretation of the trust terms will be a matter for that governing law and it should not be assumed that the meaning is the same as that under the law of England & Wales. Where a beneficiary has a current fixed entitlement

The term 'relevant property' defines a category of trust property which is subject to a special regime for inheritance tax (IHT). As described in Practice Note: Introductory guide to the taxation of trusts, the IHT treatment of trust property falls into two broad categories: • beneficial entitlement • relevant property In the 'beneficial entitlement' category, trust property is subject to IHT as if it belonged outright to the beneficiary. It is deemed to be theirs and is treated as part of their estate. Typically, this treatment applies where the beneficiary has a qualifying interest in possession (QIIP), or where they have an absolute entitlement to the trust property. See Practice Notes: Qualifying interest in possession trusts—IHT treatment and Bare trusts—IHT. By contrast, relevant property has an independent tax life. Once it is effectively removed from the settlor's estate, it is not taxed as though it were part of any other individual's estate. To compensate for this, a special regime applies. Relevant property may be subject to IHT on the following occasions: • when

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice note provides an overview of the remittance rules affecting UK resident non-domiciled individuals (non-doms). It considers what is and what is not a remittance, the extension of the remittance basis of taxation to temporary non-residents eligibility for the remittance basis, how to claim the remittance basis and the possible drawbacks of doing so. It includes references to Finance Act 2012. Abolition of the UK's existing tax regime for UK resident non-UK domiciled individuals from 6 April 2026 The UK Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, confirmed on 29 July 2024 that, with effect from 6 April 2025, the government will go ahead with the abolition of the UK's existing tax regime for UK resident non-UK domiciled individuals (non-doms) and the introduction of the new four-year FIG (foreign income and gains) exemption regime announced by the previous government at the Budget in March 2024—see: Spring Budget 2024—Private Client analysis—International. The new four-year FIG exemption regime will be available to individuals who become UK resident having been

Private Client analysis: The High Court decision in Marcus v Marcus (per Sir Anthony Mann) recently grappled with the meaning of ‘children’ as a class of beneficiaries. The decision clarifies that context is key when construing such terms and, in doing so, adopts a refreshing amount of realism. Written by James Anson-Holland, barrister, Radcliffe Chambers.

The meaning of words commonly found in Private Client drafting and legislation which are intended to refer to children can differ depending on the context. This Practice Note sets outs the meaning of commonly encountered references to children in Private Client work. Meaning of children, issue and descendants in drafting Wills and trusts Children ‘Children’ generally refers to the first generation of descendants, rather than grandchildren or remoter descendants. Whether a class gift includes a child whose parents were not married to each other must be determined under the law applicable to the disposition, subject to its terms and any admissible evidence of a contrary intention. ‘Children’ will always at least include all children born before the death of the testator (Goodwyn v Goodwyn (1748) 1 Ves. Sen. 226 (not reported by Lexis+® UK)). The treatment of children whose parents were not married to each other differs according to the date of the disposition. The Family Law Reform Act 1969, s 15 and Family Law Reform Act 1987, ss 1 and 19 contain distinct

Use of terms ‘connected’ and ‘associate’ in pensions Although originally defined for use under the insolvency framework as set out under the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), the concepts of 'association’ and ’connection’ under that Act (together with the related concept of 'control’) have increasingly been adopted for use in various aspects of the UK’s pensions legislation. Examples include: • moral hazard powers—the terms are used under the moral hazard provisions of the Pensions Act 2004 (PeA 2004) to determine the degree of remoteness of entities from the sponsoring employers of occupational pension schemes and whether such entities are potentially vulnerable to the exercise by the Pensions Regulator of its moral hazard powers, eg the issuing of financial support directions and contribution notices—for further information, see Practice Notes: Contribution notices and Financial support directions • employer-related investments—the terms are used under the employer-related investment legislation in relation to the ability of trustees of occupational pension schemes to enter into dealings with the schemes’ sponsoring employers or parties associated

The major gateway issue for any claim brought under a bilateral investment treaty (BIT), multilateral investment treaty (MIT) or foreign investment laws will be whether the investor actually qualifies as an ‘investor’ and whether that investor’s interests in the host state qualify as an ‘investment’. If a potential claimant is not a qualifying investor holding a qualifying investment under the relevant treaty or law, then the substantive protections will not apply and there will be no legitimate jurisdictional scope for pursuing an investor-state arbitration. The definitions of ‘investor’ and ‘investment’ will vary between BITs, but some overall themes emerge and certain components of the definitions are common to many BITs. This Practice Note sets out an overview of those themes and typical issues that arise in relation to the definitions of ‘investor’ and ‘investment’. The meaning of investor An investor will typically mean an individual citizen of the investor’s home state or a company incorporated in the investor’s home state (domicile).

IP analysis: The court held that the meaning of ‘original’ for the purpose of design rights under Part III of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988) is the same as for copyright under Part I. That is to say, a design is original if it is the expression of the designer’s intellectual creation. In doing so, the court rejected an argument that the meaning of ‘original’ for Part III was that the design represented sufficient time, skill and labour of the designer. The latter test was the test under English law for copyright and unregistered designs prior to the influence of EU law. Written by Michael Smith, barrister at Three Stone Chambers.

There is a devolved legislature (and executive branch) in three of the component parts of the UK. However, the way in which powers were devolved to each of those legislatures was not uniform, and a large part of the UK does not have any form of devolved legislature interposed between the UK government at Westminster and its citizens. This Practice Note explains the background to the various approaches, and gives an overview of the way in which powers are devolved, and how those devolved powers are exercised. Why is there variation in the devolution of powers, and their exercise within the constitutional structure of the UK? In order to understand the current constitutional structure of the UK, and the mechanics of the devolution arrangements, it is necessary to place this in the context of how this state was formed, and developed over the intervening years. Great Britain was established in 1707, by means of the Acts of Union passed by the formerly independent nation states of England and Scotland. However, while the Acts resulted in one London-based