Children's trust meaning

In this issue Equality and human rights Constitutional and administrative law Judicial review Public procurement Subsidy control and State aid Post-Brexit transition guidance Information law Other Public Law news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information No Weekly Highlights on 24 April 2025 Equality and human rights Supreme Court rules that the EqA 2010 terms ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ denote biological sex (For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers). In For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16, the UK Supreme Court unanimously concluded that these terms identify biological sex rather than ‘certificated sex’. The court determined that those holding a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) are not included within the EqA 2010 definition of their acquired gender. The ruling confirms that trans people remain safeguarded by the Act’s gender reassignment provisions and may pursue sex discrimination claims where...

In this issue: Wills Probate Trusts UK taxes for Private Client HMRC Manuals updates Tax avoidance, evasion and non-compliance Contentious trusts and estates Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland International Question of the week Daily and weekly news alerts LexTalk®Private Client: a Lexis+® community New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q&As Useful information Wills No line of sight—due execution and presence In the Estate of Kathleen Coady, District Judge Chloë Phillips delivered judgment in Coady v Coady PT-2023-BHM-000025 (Business & Property Courts in Birmingham (Probate)), addressing as a preliminary question whether a coronavirus (COVID-19) era ‘garden signing’ met section 9 of the Wills Act 1837. The court concluded it did not, rendering the 25 April 2020 Will invalid. Written by Charlotte John of Gatehouse Chambers. See News Analysis: No line of sight—due execution and presence In the Estate of Kathleen Coady. Probate...

In this issue: Education Social care Public procurement Planning Governance Children's social care Pensions Social housing Healthcare Licensing Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Education Supreme Court holds that statutory religious education and collective worship in Northern Ireland school breached human rights (JR87 and another for Judicial Review (Appellant)) In In the matter of an application by JR87 and another for Judicial Review (Appellant), the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the appeal advanced by a schoolgirl, JR87, together with her father, against the Department of Education (Northern Ireland). The court determined that delivering religious education and conducting collective worship in Northern Ireland’s controlled schools, as required by the current statutory scheme, violated their rights under Article 2 of Protocol 1 (A2P1) to the European Convention on Human Rights, when read in conjunction with Article 9 ECHR. Victoria Dennis, Educational Law Solicitor at Doyle Clayton, has offered observations on the...

Taxation regime What factors determine tax liability in your jurisdiction (eg domicile, residence or citizenship)? Türkiye’s tax landscape is intricate, operating through numerous laws, regulations, communiqués and subsequent amendments. The key legislative instruments include: Tax Procedure Law No. 213 (10 January 1961) Corporate Tax Law No. 5520 (21 June 2006) Value Added Tax Law No. 3065 (2 November 1984) Stamp Tax Law No. 488 (11 July 1964) Income Tax Law No. 193 (6 January 1961) Broadly, the Turkish Tax System is considered under three headings: (i) income taxes, such as individual income tax and corporate income tax; (ii) taxes on expenditure, including Value Added Tax (VAT), the Banking and Insurance Transactions Tax and Stamp Tax; and (iii) taxes on wealth, for example Property Tax and Inheritance and Gift Tax. For natural persons, residency, ownership of property and citizenship are key in determining which taxes apply in Türkiye. An individual’s tax burden is mainly linked to their earnings,...

The development of the law Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police has traditionally stood as the principal authority on secondary victim claims. Subsequent jurisprudence after Alcock evolved in a piecemeal way, with decisions that were sometimes inconsistent. The Supreme Court's ruling in Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust has introduced several revisions and offered much-needed certainty for practitioners. Grasping the landscape both before and after Paul matters because the underlying principles have been refined and clarified, though not every element has altered. Accordingly, this Practice Note is arranged into pre-Paul and post-Paul parts. The amendments attributable to Paul are clearly signposted within this Practice Note. For deeper commentary on the judgment, consult News Analysis: Landmark Supreme Court decision on secondary victims (Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust). It must be appreciated that claims by secondary victims form an exception to the general rule that, at common law, one individual has no legal entitlement to compensation concerning the physical integrity or condition of another. As with any exception,...

Total intestacy A total intestacy arises where none of the deceased’s estate is effectively disposed of because: no Will was made a Will was made but is invalid the Will was revoked the Will includes no disposition of the estate the Will, though valid, is ineffective, for example where the sole beneficiary died before the deceased Intestacy rules applicable on total intestacy If the deceased died intestate, Parts III and IV of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 (AEA 1925) govern: all movable property of an intestate domiciled in England and Wales, wherever that property is located all immovable property situated in England or Wales, regardless of the deceased’s domicile The intestacy provisions apply to the residuary estate not otherwise disposed of, meaning what remains once all debts are settled and any valid legacies carried out. They operate only over property that could have been the subject of a Will had...

[Your] Will—[ name of testator ]— [ explanatory note ] This [ explanatory note ] sets out the key provisions of your Will in plain terms. Please review it carefully alongside your Will. If anything does not reflect our wishes, please tell [ me OR [ name of person to contact ] ] [ before you sign. ] Revocation When you execute this Will, any earlier Wills or codicils concerning [ your UK estate OR your worldwide estate ] are revoked. As a result, only this Will records your wishes on death in relation to [ your UK estate OR your worldwide estate ]. [ International aspects ] [ [ Your Will only covers your UK assets [ and your assets outside the UK will be dealt with by a separate, local Will OR and your assets outside the UK have already been dealt with by a separate, local Will ] OR Your Will covers your worldwide...

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: Potential changes to Wills Act 1837 The Law Commission’s review of wills culminated in a final report on 16 May 2025. Volume II contains a Draft Bill proposing replacement of the Wills Act 1837. For details of these proposals, including the published draft legislation, see Practice Note: Hot topic—modernising Wills and Modernising wills: Final Report Volume II: Draft Bill for a new Wills Act. STOP PRESS: Abolition of non-dom regime and introduction of residence-based IHT regime The Finance Act 2025 (FA 2025), which received Royal Assent on 20 March 2025, implements the abolition of the remittance basis and introduces a residence-based regime from 6 April 2025. FA 2025 makes residence, rather than domicile, the main determinant of liability to inheritance tax. changes to the rules defining excluded property status; removal of protected settlements status for offshore trusts; and modifications to overseas workday relief. For further information, see Practice Notes: The abolition of the remittance basis of taxation...

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: Potential changes to Wills Act 1837 On 16 May 2025, the Law Commission’s review of Wills published its final report, formally setting out its conclusions, with Volume II containing a draft Bill intended to supersede the Wills Act 1837. For details of these proposals, including the published draft legislation, consult Practice Note: Hot topic—modernising Wills and Modernising wills: Final Report Volume II: draft Bill for a new Wills Act. STOP PRESS: Ending the non-dom regime and moving to a residence-based IHT regime. The Finance Act 2025 (FA 2025), which obtained Royal Assent on 20 March 2025, enacts legislation for the removal of the remittance basis of taxation and substitutes a residence-based system commencing on 6 April 2025. It also displaces domicile as the principal determinant of inheritance tax (IHT) liability for individuals. Further measures cover revisions to the rules for excluded property status, the removal of protected settlements status for offshore trusts, and alterations to overseas workday relief as applicable. For more on these reforms, see...

A nil-rate band discretionary trust A nil-rate band discretionary trust is a common method for reducing inheritance tax. It typically concerns property held by two people (most often a husband and wife as co-owners). They must own the home as beneficial tenants in common, meaning that any existing beneficial joint tenancy has to be broken. Each then executes a Will so that their share of the property, up to the inheritance tax nil-rate band, is directed not to the spouse but into a discretionary trust. The usual discretionary beneficiaries are the surviving spouse and the children. Instead of the survivor taking outright the other’s share of the property (whether by survivorship where it was a beneficial joint tenancy or by a legacy), the trust retains that share and, on the death of the survivor, the portion within the trust does not fall into the estate for inheritance tax purposes...

For this Q&A, it is taken that, during their joint lifetimes, both spouses were the registered legal owners. Following the first death, the surviving spouse became the legal title holder on trust, holding one half share for the late spouse and the other half share for themselves under that trust. By executing a deed of variation, the survivor then came to hold the legal title on trust so that a 50% beneficial share belonged to the deceased’s children, with the balance 50% beneficial share remaining with the survivor as their own interest. Only equitable beneficial interests can be severed. A legal estate can only subsist as a joint tenancy, pursuant to section 36(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925)...

Higher rates of SDLT on additional residential properties Refer to the Practice Note: Higher rates of SDLT on additional residential properties, which confirms that a beneficiary of a bare trust or a life interest is treated as the purchaser for the 3% higher rates; see also paragraphs 10–11 of Part 3 of Schedule 4ZA to the Finance Act 2003. The Practice Note also sets out the SDLT position where the beneficiary is a minor. If the remaining conditions in that Practice Note are fulfilled (for instance, the properties are dwellings and both interests in land are major interests), the beneficiary must apply the additional 3% rate of SDLT when acquiring an extra property. For further guidance, see: HMRC's SDLT manual: SDLTM09815 Interests Treated As Owned By An Individual, Trusts, Children [Including Children Subject To The Mental Health Acts] Commentary: Settlements and bare trusts: Tolley's Stamp Taxes 2019–20 4.19 [4.19] Stamp duty land tax charge: Tolley's Estate...