Australian tax law bites trust law on franking credits

The High Court of Australia has restored sanity in a long running saga in which a trustee purported to separate franking credits from the underlying dividends in allocations to beneficiaries. The Court held (as the parties now accepted) that this was not possible and that a contrary decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland in its trusts jurisdiction to which the Commissioner of Taxation was not party did not bind the Commissioner. To find out more, please read below.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Australia, Tax

English High Court finds son entitled to family farm based upon proprietary estoppel

In Thompson v Thompson [2018] EWHC 1338, the High Court in London ruled in favour of a son who sought a declaration based on proprietary estoppel that would entitle him to inherit the family farm upon the death of his mother. We discuss this case further below. Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Estates disputes, London, Wills

Australian Board of Taxation reviews residency test for individuals

On 9 July 2018, the Board of Taxation (the “Board“) released its self-initiated report ‘Review of the Income Tax Residency Rules for Individuals’ (the “Report). To read more, please see below. Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Australia, Tax

English High Court considers scope of beneficiaries right to request information from trustees

In the recent case of Lewis v Tamplin ([2018] EWHC 777 Ch) the London High Court was asked to exercise its jurisdiction to supervise trustees in the performance of their obligations by requiring trustees to give disclosure of documents requested by certain beneficiaries. The case also serves as a reminder of the rules regarding privilege between trustees and beneficiaries. We consider this case further below. Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Disclosure, London, Trust disputes

Herbert Smith Freehills Private Wealth Seminar – Jersey, 10 July 2018

Herbert Smith Freehills LLP is pleased to announce that we are holding a Private Wealth Seminar at lunchtime on 10 July 2018 in Jersey.

The seminar will be considering the current and future focus of HMRC in connection with estate planning and key issues arising when tax and other professional advice goes wrong.

Topics covered will include:

  • Penalties for advisers who enable avoidance and possible defences.
  • Proposed simplification of inheritance tax and taxation of trusts.
  • Changes to the taxation of non-UK residents holding UK real estate.
  • UK tax implications of becoming deemed domicile under the recently amended UK rules.
  • Potential claims by trustees against professional advisers in relation to UK tax advice and the structuring of assets.
  • Considerations for trustees when bringing professional negligence claims.

If you are interested in attending, please click here for sign-up details.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

New Zealand Court of Appeal grants reverse summary judgment in claims for dishonest assistance against solicitor

In McKay & Ors v Sandman [2018] NZCA 103, the New Zealand Court of Appeal granted a claim for summary judgment in relation to claims brought on the basis of alleged dishonest assistance. We consider this case further below. Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Estates disputes, New Zealand

NEW ZEALAND COURT GRANTS INTERIM ORDER TO PREVENT CREMATION AFTER WEIGHING BALANCE OF CONVENIENCE

In Clark v Cottingham [2018] NZHC 773, the New Zealand High Court considered an oral and without notice application for an interim order to prevent a cremation which was to be held in the afternoon on the same day of the hearing. The Court granted the order in terms, deciding that there was a serious issue to be tried and that far greater harm would result if the order was not made.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

HONG KONG COURT OF APPEAL REAFFIRMS NATURE OF BEDDOE APPLICATIONS

The Court of Appeal in Hong Kong has recently reaffirmed the nature of the Beddoe jurisdiction in Jong Yat Kit (as Sole Administrator of the Estate of Li Chung (Deceased) v Lee Man For and Ors (unrep, CACV 147/2017, [2018] HKCA 235). In adopting its previous decision in Re Mong Man Wai, Deceased [2013] 4 HKC 179, this case provides a reminder to defendant beneficiaries that the Beddoe jurisdiction is not a trial. Although a beneficiary defendant may be heard in such an application, the focus of the Beddoe court is the protection of the trust or estate’s interest such that a worthwhile claim should not be left unpursued for want of indemnity from the trust or estate against the trustee or personal representative’s potential exposure to costs. We consider the decision further below.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Hong Kong and Singapore, Trustee directions

Cayman court rejects request to appoint receivers over a discretionary trust interest

The Grand Court of the Cayman Islands has held that a discretionary interest under a Cayman Islands law trust is not an asset over which a receiver can be appointed for the purposes of enforcing an arbitral award (Y v R – Mangatal J, 9 January 2018). Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Trust disputes

ENGLISH HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE USE OF THE COURT’S EQUITABLE JURISDICTION TO REMEDY DEFECTIVE EXECUTION

In the recent High Court decision of English v Keats [2018] EWHC 637 (Ch), the Court confirmed that it will use its equitable jurisdiction to remedy the defective execution of a deed of appointment. The case, in certain circumstances, has arguably also widened the meaning of ‘defective execution’, to include cases where one of the appointers failed to sign the deed. The case has cemented the modern application of this doctrine which dates back to at least 1728 and the case has also provided the potential for the scope of the “categories of people” condition to be reformed and widened in the future. Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Trust disputes