Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
Unequal chances? Ethnic disproportionality in child welfare and family justice
Many have experienced their own Black Lives Matter moment in the last 12 months, a sharp realisation of entrenched prejudices and inequalities that still exist in our society.In the family justice...
Changes to the law on Domestic Abuse
Official statistics (ONS (2016), March 2015 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW)) show that around 2 million people suffer from some form of domestic abuse each year in the UK. In...
Managing costs in complex children cases
In November 2020 Spice Girl Mel B was in the news, despairing about how the legal costs of trying to relocate her daughter Madison from the US to England were likely to bankrupt her, leading to her...
View all articles
Authors

APPEALS/FINANCIAL PROVISION: Re A (Trust Fund) [2006] EWCA Civ 1441

Sep 29, 2018, 17:38 PM
Slug : re-a-trust-fund-2006-ewca-civ-1441
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Dec 1, 2006, 10:58 AM
Article ID : 89005

(Court of Appeal; Thorpe and Moses LJJ; 9 November 2006)

The trustees of a trust fund set up for the benefit of a child on the basis of an order made by a Family Division judge sought leave to vary the terms of the order. Subsequent unforeseen tax consequences had arisen, primarily because of a mistake as to the child's nationality. The trustees argued that the court had jurisdiction to alter the order, thereby creating a different trust, by reference to s 3 of the Children Act 1989 (the 1989 Act) read with s 8.

Under the 1989 Act the court had jurisdiction to ensure that parental responsibility was properly exercised by the guardian of a child's property. Although initially concerned that the court was being asked to assist with tax planning, the court accepted that there had been an unforeseeable mistake which it was appropriate to correct. However, the case had not needed to be dealt with by means of an appeal to the Court of Appeal; the case could have been dealt with by the Chancery Division exercising the inherent jurisdiction.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from