The draft HMRC guidance issued on 9 October 2017 states on page 19 in the section entitled ‘Can you give examples of how a beneficiary should be identified/named?’ that the grandchildren of the settlor, who are all living, should be identified as a class unless named. By contrast, on page 20 of the same guidance, in the example of a trust settled by John Smith and Jane Green, HMRC state that: ‘When a child or grandchild is born, at that point in time he or she should be named on the TRS’. In ‘5.3.2 Which beneficial owners do the trustees need to note and record?’ of the Law Society Guidance dated 19 September 2017, it states that the trust’s beneficial owners includes: ‘beneficiaries named

Subject to any restrictions included by the donor in the lasting power of attorney (LPA), the attorney under a property and financial affairs LPA will be able to do almost anything which the donor could have done for themselves in relation to their financial affairs. However, in addition to the terms of the LPA, the authority conferred by an LPA is also subject to the provisions of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005), and, in particular, sections 1 (the principles)

This Q&A raises the issue of the rights of neighbouring owners of land in respect of fences running between them. It raises both property rights and remedies in tort. The reference to an adjoining owner suggests that it is raised from the perspective of the other landowner, irrespective of whether that be the owner of the fence itself. For convenience, this person will be called the primary owner. The Q&A does not state who owns the fence. It is often understood that the location of posts to which any fencing is attached will determine who owns it. As far as it goes, this might give rise to a presumption, namely that a landowner erecting a fence will have placed the posts on his own land rather than that of his neighbour and then attach fencing panels to it as close to the line of the boundary

This question raises the security of tenure for residential occupiers of properties. It is necessary in particular to consider the statutory protection which they enjoy under the Housing Act 1988. The situation is not unusual. The seller has difficulty in moving out of the property on the date proposed by the buyer for completion when, in the ordinary course of events, he will be required to give vacant possession. The difficulty is that if an assured tenancy with the protection of the Act is granted, then by s 5 of the Housing Act (HA 1988), it can only be brought to an end by obtaining an order for possession and the execution

You may wish to consider: • rejection of the claim under the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 (ET Rules 2013), r 12 (set out in Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/1237) • the employment tribunal’s power to strike out all or part of a claim under ET Rules 2013, r 37 • the employment tribunal’s power to add, substitute or remove parties under ET Rules 2013, r 34 • circumstances where claims may be brought against an individual (eg a fellow employee) If the fellow employee against whom the claim has been brought is still employed by the employer, it is likely that the employer will want to support that individual in dealing with the claim, not least to maintain the relationship

Practice Notes: Family provision claims—children and those treated as children and Family provision claims—matters of regard for each applicant provide an overview in respect of claims made by a child of the deceased. Under section 1(1)(c) of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975), children of the deceased are persons who may make a claim for reasonable financial provision from the deceased’s estate. I(PFD)A 1975, s 3(1)(a) provides that when making an order under I(PFD)A 1975, s 2, the court must consider ‘the financial resources and financial needs which the applicant has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future’. I(PFD)A 1975, s 3(3) provides: ‘(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (g) of subsection (1) above, where an application for an order under

The terms on which the new lease is to be granted are dealt with by section 57 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993). In particular, LRHUDA 1993, s 57(9) states: ‘Where any person— (a) is a third party to the existing lease, or (b) (not being the

The word ‘normally’ indicates flexibility or discretion rather than a strict rule. The following points should be considered when deciding whether a trustee's service can be extended beyond three terms: General expectation The phrase means that the usual practice or standard expectation is that trustees will serve no more than three consecutive terms (for example, three terms of three years each, if that’s the term

In this Q&A we refer to a business-to-business contract which is not subject to specific sector or industry regulation. We have also assumed that the contract is silent as to the rights of termination of the party seeking to terminate it (rather than it providing a specific prohibition). We have also assumed that there are no circumstances existing which would otherwise provide the party with a common law right to terminate (such as for breach). The Q&A Can I terminate a contract on reasonable notice? explains ‘… the courts now tend to look at the agreement to see what the parties' intention was. The general rule is that a contract can be terminated on reasonable notice (except for certain statutory exceptions such as commercial agency arrangements). In Broome v Pardess Co-operative Society of Orange Growers (Est 1900) Ltd at [612], recently cited with approval by Patten J in WX Investments Ltd v Begg at

Where the employee has given notice of termination in accordance with the contract of employment, and the employer chooses to terminate the contract of employment early by giving counter-notice of termination to the employee during the notice period: • this will not ordinarily amount to a breach of contract by the employer, provided the employer complies with his obligations as to statutory and contractual notice (and other contractual

Under section 693 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006), a limited company may only carry out an off-market share buyback (that is not for the purposes of, or pursuant to, an employees' share scheme) pursuant to a contract that is approved in accordance with CA 2006, s 694, before the share buyback takes place. A share buyback contract is entered into between a company and one or more of its shareholders whose shares are to be bought back. CA 2006, s 694(3) provides that it may be: • a contract entitling or requiring the company to purchase the relevant shares, or • a contract under which the company may, subject

A tenancy which has the protection of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954), cannot come to an end unless terminated in accordance with LTA 1954 provisions (LTA 1954, s 24(1)). This means that, provided LTA 1954 applies on the contractual termination date (by the tenant occupying the premises for the purposes of a business (LTA 1954, s 23(1)), the tenancy will continue. A landlord can still bring the tenancy to an end if a right to forfeit the lease has arisen (LTA 1954, s 23(2)), but assuming that not to be the case, the landlord can only bring it to an end by serving a notice under LTA 1954, s 25. Such a notice must specify a termination