It is not unusual for property to be co-owned by family members within a farming family, regardless of whether or not those members are actively involved in the farming business.

Commercial leases are unlikely to include provision for rent suspension in circumstances of a health epidemic and tenants will be left to try and negotiate a rent-free period or discounted rent with their landlord.

There has been a flurry of Inheritance Act 1975 cases in the last few weeks, most recently the case of Re H where an adult child claimant was successful despite her being estranged from her father and having had no financial assistance from him for a number of years prior to his death, and he had left his estate to his elderly and disabled spouse.

A recent decision by the First-tier Tribunal has decided that contributions to, and subsequent loans from, a remuneration trust scheme were not ‘earnings’ or disguised remuneration.

I acted for the beneficiary of a trust who was concerned that trust assets to which he was entitled had been maladministered.

2019 has also seen some interesting developments in the context of Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 proceedings.

Proprietary estoppel is a legal remedy that permits people who, having been promised land, property or a combination of both (usually a farm) and relied on that promise to their detriment, to bring a claim if that promise is reneged on.

Historically courts have taken a robust approach to protecting gifts contained in wills for the benefit of a charity. A number of recent cases suggest a change of approach towards charities. A notable case, which reflects these changing attitudes is the case of Gill and Woodall [2010].

Dilapidations are a large part of commercial leasehold properties. They relate to breaches of covenants under a lease agreement in relation to repair, decoration, or reinstatement obligations covering the condition of the property as compared to the beginning of the tenancy. The tenant is typically responsible for the dilapidations and they must comply with the terms of the lease during and at the end of the tenancy.

In 2023, a shareholder recovered the VAT paid on professional fees despite making an exempt sale of the shares in their company. HMRC rejected the shareholder’s claim, but the Tribunals have accepted the shareholder’s arguments. The case is Hotel La Tour Ltd [2023] UKUT 00178 (TCC). Shareholders should now be considering whether they can structure their share sales in order to recover VAT on professional fees, or whether share sales in the past four years qualified for input tax recovery.