Private Client client guides

Overview Content for select subtopic is not present

Latest Private Client News

Finance Bill 2025 update: Public Bill Committee to begin in January

The Public Bill Committee is expected to begin scrutiny of the Finance Bill on 28 January 2025. Comments on the Bill are invited before then, and revised explanatory notes have been issued to cover the Government’s proposed Pillar 2 amendments.

Private Client weekly highlights—19 December 2024

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) HMRC updates form IHT100f; (2) Knight v Barnsley, which held that the Court of Protection did have jurisdiction to determine a dispute over a claimant’s deputy’s release from reverse indemnity undertakings; (3) Manolete Partners Plc v White, in which the Court of Appeal held that occupation pension benefits are generally inalienable; (4) Hannah v Revenue and Customs Commissioners, where the First Tier Tribunal (Tax) permitted the amendment of grounds of appeal to include ground that the transfer of assets abroad regime is incompatible with EU law; (5) Hirachand v Hirachand, a decision of the Supreme Court which makes it clear that success fees cannot be included in awards for financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975; and (6) the Chancellor has confirmed that the Spring Forecast will take place on 26 March 2025.

Question of the week: Does the inheritance tax exemption for transfers between spouses apply where both spouses are non-UK domiciled and make a transfer of UK situs assets between them?

This Q&A considers the exemption from inheritance tax on a transfer between spouses who both have non-UK domicile status.

Supreme Court unanimously allows appeal (Hirachand v Hirachand and another)

The Supreme Court has unanimously allowed the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975) appeal and excluded from the order, in favour of the daughter, any sum for the success fee. Richard Dew, barrister at Ten Old Square, comments that the decision that costs cannot be recovered as part of the award restores the position to what it ought to have been and Brie Stevens-Hoare KC of Gatehouse Chambers highlights that the decision will ensure that applicants who use conditional fee agreements to access justice pay the price of their costs being conditional. Oliver Ingham of 3 Paper Buildings further notes the Supreme Court has made clear that success fees remain the responsibility of the claimant, preserving the integrity of the wider costs regime and ensuring consistency across civil litigation.

View Private Client by content type :

News

Practice notes

Precedents

Q&As

Popular documents

If planning permission imposes restrictions on a licensed premises opening hours, once operational can

If planning permission imposes restrictions on a licensed premises opening hours, once operational can the personal licence holder apply for a Temporary Events Notice (TEN) to open for longer hours than those permitted in the planning permission?To use any property for a licensable activity both

Micklefield clauses

Micklefield clausesWhat is a Micklefield clause?It is common for employee share plans to provide that, on termination of employment (or when an employee is given or receives notice of termination of employment), subsisting share awards will be forfeited and subsisting share options will lapse.It is

Early leavers—preservation

Early leavers—preservationFORTHCOMING DEVELOPMENT: Section 10 of the Finance Act 2022 will increase the normal minimum pension age (NMPA) from 55 to 57 on 6 April 2028 (save for members of the firefighters, police and armed forces public service pension schemes).The Finance Act 2022 will also give

Brussels I (recast)—domicile (Arts 4 and 63) [Archived]

Brussels I (recast)—domicile (Arts 4 and 63) [Archived]ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained.This Practice Note considers the general rule set out in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) when determining the relevance of a defendant’s domicile to