Green v Cobham: ChD 19 Jan 2000

cw The Trustees had overlooked the fact that a Will Trust and two sub-settlements together constituted a single composite settlement for the purposes of CGT with a single body of trustees. As a result of his retirement from practice the solicitor to a non-resident will trust was no longer treated as non-resident for capital gains tax purposes, with the result that there was no longer a majority of non-resident trustees and the will trust became a United Kingdom resident trust.
Held: The deed of appointment was set aside. The exercise of the power of appointment, by trustees failing to take any account of the potentially adverse capital gains tax consequences, was invalid.

Jonathan Parker J
(2002) STC 820, [2000] EWHC 1564 (Ch), (2001-02) 4 ITELR 785, [2000] WTLR 1101, [2002] STC 820, [2002] STI 879, [2002] BTC 170
England and Wales
Cited by:
appliedAbacus Trust Company (Isle of Man) Ltd and Another v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children ChD 17-Jul-2001
The claimants were beneficiaries, trustee and protector of a trust fund. In order to mitigate Capital Gains Tax liability they sought advice, and, following that advice, entered into a deed of gift in favour of the respondent charity. The deed . .
CitedAMP (UK) Plc and Another v Barker and Others ChD 8-Dec-2000
The claimants were interested under a pension scheme. Alterations had been made, which the said had been in error, and they sought rectification to remove a link between early leaver benefits and incapacity benefits. The defendant trustees agreed . .
CitedFutter and Another v Futter and Others ChD 11-Mar-2010
Various family settlements had been created. The trustees wished to use the rule in Hastings-Bass to re-open decisions they had made after receiving incorrect advice.
Held: The deeds were set aside as void. The Rule in Hastings-Bass derives . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Capital Gains Tax, Equity

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.182188