A recent Inheritance Provision decision highlights this point. Mr Banfield and Mrs Campbell had lived together for some years before Mrs Campbell died on 7 October 2015. Mrs Campbell had been widowed and had one son, James, from her first marriage. The main asset of her estate was her property. By her will made in 2001, Mrs Campbell left Mr Banfield £5,000 and the residue to James, who was 25 at the time.
Mr Banfield and Mrs Campbell never married, and although there was an argument as to the status of their relationship, the Court found that they had been cohabiting from about 2002. By the time of Mrs Campbell’s death, Mr Banfield had not only sold his own property but was also disabled, and Mrs Campbell was to some extent his carer, due to his mobility issues.
Mr Banfield brought a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act, primarily seeking accommodation. Mr Banfield put the cost of these needs at £450,000, whilst James submitted that they were £220,000. The Court refused to make an outright award to Mr Banfield but did grant a life interest in one-half of the net sale proceeds of the Deceased’s property, together with a further £20,000 to enable special adaptations as necessary.
The Court had regard to comments made by Lord Hughes JSC in Ilott v Blue Cross [2017] UKSC17 that the purpose of the provision is to provide maintenance during a lifetime – also noting that Mrs Campbell had inherited the property from her late husband, James’s father. As such, a life interest was the appropriate provision for Mr Banfield.
From an Inheritance Tax (IHT) perspective, this means that tax will be payable on Mrs Campbell’s death, as her estate exceeded the relevant thresholds and the surviving spouse exemption was not applicable to the provision for Mr Banfield. However, it will also be payable on the Trust Fund on Mr Banfield’s death, assuming his estate exceeds the nil-rate threshold. There will be no transferrable nil-rate allowance nor any residence nil-rate allowance, as James is not his step-son.
Had Mrs Campbell reviewed her will, other options could have been considered – including the possibility of marriage, lifetime gifts, or settlements. Whilst the relief was not available when Mrs Campbell died, there is now the Residence Nil-Rate Band Relief to which Mrs Campbell would have been entitled in principle, together with the transferrable relief from her late husband’s estate. If nothing else, updating the will in light of advice from a solicitor with an accompanying note of explanation for the benefit of James and Mr Banfield might have avoided considerable expense to the estate, and no doubt a difficult relationship between James and Mr Banfield.
If you would like more information on this briefing, or for any enquiries related to wills, please contact Alex Elphinston.
The European Court has upheld the long-standing principle that parties to a dispute should be able to choose their lawyers without having to go through a tender process (or use a framework).
On 8 July, news broke of the staggering fine of more than £183m the ICO intended to levy against British Airways as a result of a hack that took place in 2018, compromising 500,000 customers' data.
The Government has been refused permission to appeal a decision ruling that transitional arrangements in public sector pension schemes are discriminatory.
The Lifeline Project was a well-regarded charity. Failure to carry out the targets within the contracts led the charity into insolvency and resulted in a personal, 7-year disqualification order.
Many local authorities have assessed that a trading subsidiary or trading structure could be beneficial as part of generating income or the service delivery matrix.
On 23 July, trainees from Anthony Collins Solicitors will host an ‘experience day’, which will involve various activities and presentations, with lawyers and non-lawyers from across the firm.
The Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) has launched a new scheme specifically for charities and not-for-profit organisations who want to advise EU citizens on UK settlement.
In the second part of our series on contract management pitfalls, we look at the risks and opportunities presented by payment mechanisms in construction contracts.
The Government has resurrected its plans to cap the termination payments for exiting employees in the public sector.
Under most construction contracts, the contractor takes on the ground conditions risk. However, a recent case has demonstrated that the risk can fall on the employer.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.