It appears that most credit card issuers treat gambling payments as cash withdrawals. This means that online gamblers who fund online betting accounts using credit cards will be

A landlord waives its right to forfeit a lease if it unequivocally affirms the existence of the lease, in full knowledge that the tenant has committed a breach of covenant. Whether a right to forfeit has been waived will be judged objectively, so that provided the landlord has knowledge of the breach and acts in a way which is consistent with the continuation of the lease, its intentions are

Private Client analysis: William Oliver died on 25 May 2018, at the age of 86 years. He was a widower, with five surviving children. The claimant, Jane, was his youngest daughter. She sought to set aside his last Will made in 2015 on the grounds that—a) it did not comply with the formalities to make a Will (see section 9 of the Wills Act 1837); and b) William lacked testamentary capacity when he made that Will; or c) the Will was procured by undue influence. The defendant, Rodney, was William's eldest surviving son and sole beneficiary of the 2015 will. He did not engage with the court process and refused to produce the original of William's penultimate Will, made in 2009. The claim was successful on the ground that William lacked testamentary capacity in 2015. The court also found that the Will was invalid on the ground of undue influence. Written by Alexandra Rogers, managing associate at Foot Anstey LLP.

When a company acquires property from a connected person SDLT is generally charged by reference to the market value of the property acquired (rather than the chargeable consideration) unless an exception or a relief applies. Where there is: • a land transaction between a vendor and a purchaser which is a company • the vendor and purchaser are connected (connected for these purposes is set out in section 1122 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 (CTA 2010), or • all or part of the consideration for the land transaction is the issue or transfer of shares the chargeable consideration for the transaction will be not less than the market value of the subject matter of the transaction. Under CTA 2010, s 1122(3) a company is connected

Will substitutes are arrangements that pass property on death outside the terms of a will and outside the formal requirements for making a will. The expression is descriptive rather than a defined statutory term in the UK or Ireland, but is widely used in private client practice and academic commentary.Typical will substitutes include nominations (for example, in pension schemes or certain credit union accounts), joint tenancies/right of survivorship, life assurance written in trust, payable‑on‑death clauses in some investment products, and lifetime trusts where the settlor retains benefits until death. These mechanisms take effect by survivorship, contract or trust law rather than succession law, and generally do not form part of the deceased’s probate estate (or, in Scotland, estate for confirmation), though they may still be relevant for inheritance tax or legal rights/forced heirship claims.Usage is broadly consistent across England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, but practitioners must consider jurisdiction‑specific rules on matrimonial property, clawback, legal rights in Scotland and section 117 Succession Act 1965 in Ireland, as well as financial provision on divorce or death. Will substitutes are central to estate planning, probate risk management and contentious succession work.

Private Client analysis: The High Court Chancery Division recently delivered judgment following a five-day contested hearing in a dispute involving the estate of the late Anna Rea who died in 2019. The dispute concerned which of two Wills made by the testatrix, in 1986 and 2015 respectively, should be admitted to probate. The litigation had a long history with a first trial finding in favour of the 2015 Will, an unsuccessful first appeal to the High Court against that finding, and finally a successful challenge to the first trial before the Court of Appeal who ordered a re-trial because of a serious procedural irregularity which afflicted the first trial. Written by Graeme Wood of Europa Lawyers.

The 10% increase in general damages in all civil claims decided after 1 April 2013 does not apply if the case is funded by way of a pre-commencement

Our answer assumes that the property owned by the taxpayer is a residential property being used as their main residence. Position before 22 November 2017 The stamp duty land tax (SDLT) provisions are set out in Part 4 of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003). SDLT is charged on chargeable land transactions. A land transaction is defined as the acquisition of a chargeable interest. A chargeable interest includes freehold and leasehold estates. '[T]he variation of a lease is an acquisition and disposal of a chargeable interest only where… it takes effect, or is treated for the purposes of this Part, as the grant of a new lease…' (FA 2003, s 43(3)(d)). 'Where any consideration in money or money's worth (other than an increase in rent) is given by the lessee for any variation of a lease, other than a variation of the amount

The higher rates of the stamp duty land tax (SDLT) apply to the purchase of a major interest in a single dwelling by an individual, if at the end of the day of purchase, conditions A to D are met: • Condition A—the chargeable consideration for the transaction is £40,000 or more • Condition B—the dwelling is not subject to a lease which has more than 21 years to run on the date of purchase • Condition C—the purchaser owns an interest in another dwelling which has a market value of £40,000 or more and is not subject to

For the purpose of this Q&A we have assumed that the testator and the putative civil partner are both resident in the UK and that the civil partnership will comply with the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004). For Wills made on or after 5 December 2005, Wills Act 1837 (WA 1837). WA 1837, s 18B provides that a Will shall not be revoked by the testator

Practice Note: The deputyship order explains that, since the introduction of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005), deputyship orders are in most cases widely drafted and, subject to any specific restrictions in the order itself or imposed by MCA 2005, leave the deputy free to work within the framework of MCA 2005, exercising their authority to the extent necessary and acting in the best interests of P. The deputy is typically given general authority to take possession or control of the property and affairs of P and to exercise the same powers of management and investment as P has as beneficial owner, subject to the terms and conditions of the order. This wide power would enable the deputy to buy and sell investments or property. There are, however, circumstances in which an unrestricted order may not be granted, for example where there has been a history of financial

MLex: The EU is preparing a Chips Act 2.0 after its first semiconductor push three years ago failed to deliver major investments, most prominently Intel’s canceled €30bn project. Analysts say the original legislation lacked clear goals. Industry voices now urge Brussels to focus a revamp of the Act on AI-related chips, boosting demand and building on Europe’s strengths rather than pursuing full technological autonomy.