Legal News

In a letter to Parliament dated 26 June 2025 and made public on 7 July 2025, HMRC said its projection follows a parliamentary consultation and a May 2025 National Audit Office ( NAO) report that found the scale of tax avoidance and evasion among the wealthy could be far greater than the NAO had previously believed. HMRC will channel increased investment into bolstering offshore non-compliance inquiries, particularly suspected tax fraud by wealthy individuals, companies they control and other connected bodies. It also expects added headcount to deliver an overall 20% rise in decisions to bring charges against alleged tax cheats. The letter set out penalties imposed for offshore evasion and non-compliance since the 2018–19 tax year, totalling more than £125m. The overwhelming majority by volume (around 6,000 separate penalties) and by value (circa £38m) related to failures to file tax returns, HMRC said. HMRC also...

See Q& A: Is there any requirement for the majority of the trustees of a charitable trust registered with the Charity Commission of England and Wales to be resident in England or Wales? There is no legal rule requiring most trustees of a Charity Commission‑registered charity to live in England or Wales. Provided the governing document allows it and eligibility is satisfied, you may appoint a trustee based outside the UK, including: non‑ British citizens British citizens living overseas people holding temporary visas asylum seekers residing in the UK Every trustee must still be eligible and meet the relevant criteria. Under charity law, a person cannot act if disqualified, for example due to: convictions for specified offences inclusion on the sex offenders register bankruptcy removal from an earlier trusteeship for...

Sidoli and another v Sidoli and another [2025] EWHC 1425 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Parties should select the forum for their disputes with care. In Sidoli, the initial claim was issued in the Italian courts due to the deceased’s nationality, and its progress was markedly delayed (with inevitable cost). Yet the estate’s assets were in England, and, in the end, attempts to enforce in England did not succeed. Practitioners should think closely about what directions are needed when contesting registration under the FJ( RE) A 1933, and state their objections clearly and early. The Deputy Master noted there had been no directions hearings; the only directions were by agreement and dealt with on paper. It was, however, evident that expert evidence on the character of the Italian proceedings and the resulting judgments would have greatly assisted the court, and that...

Scrutiny of the art market The recent conviction of art dealer Oghenochuko Ojiri for offences under the Terrorism Act 2000 ( TA 2000) underscores the substantial risks facing art market professionals. Agents, galleries, dealers, and others trading in art operate within a regulatory regime that brings serious penalties for non-compliance, alongside the reputational harm that commonly follows any breach. Ojiri, the founder of Ramp Gallery, now operating as Ojiri Gallery, admitted eight counts under the TA 2000 for failing to make required disclosures while conducting business in a regulated sector. The prosecution concerned his sale of artwork worth about £140,000 to a suspected Hezbollah financier, sanctioned by the United States in 2019 and the United Kingdom in 2023. After entering guilty pleas, he received a sentence of two and a half years’ imprisonment. Although the first case of its kind, it serves as a clear...

In this issue: Probate Powers of attorney and advance decisions Court of Protection Elderly and vulnerable clients UK taxes for Private Client HMRC Manuals tracker Tax avoidance, evasion and non-compliance Insolvency—private client Charity and philanthropy Contentious trusts and estates Private Client in Scotland International Question of the week Additional Private Client updates this week Lex Talk®Private Client: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Useful information Probate Agreement to waive forfeiture rule following assisted death On 16 June 2025, the High Court approved an order on the executor’s application, supported by those who might otherwise benefit under the forfeiture rule, in the estate of the late David Walter Peace. Mr Peace died at the...

See Q& A: An interim payment from the deceased’s estate allocated the following shares: A — 30% B — 30% C — 30% D — 10% A, B and C now intend to retain the deceased’s house, which could require repayment of some or all of the interim sums. At the same time, B plans to buy out C. A acts as trustee of a discretionary trust, and D consents to the proposal. What Stamp Duty Land Tax consequences arise from this arrangement, and are there any other tax implications? Assume throughout that A, B, C and D are all beneficiaries of the residuary estate. The initial issue is the appropriation of real property within the estate to some, though not all, of the beneficiaries. For guidance on the authority of personal representatives to meet, in whole or in part, a...

Osmond and Allen v HMRC [2025] UKUT 183 ( TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? The UT’s ruling reinforces the separation between a transaction’s inevitable outcomes and its underlying objective, aligning with advisers’ long‑held view that the TIS rules were never engaged where a transaction principally sought to mitigate capital gains tax ( CGT), and did not principally aim to reduce income tax. Delivered alongside other judgments underscoring the weight of taxpayers’ subjective aims, the ruling confirms that merely bringing about unavoidable tax results does not, by itself, defeat the main purpose test; something additional is required (as Lady Justice Falk explained in Blackrock Hold Co 5 v HMRC [2024] STC 740 ( Blackrock)). It illustrates that proof indicating a subjective main purpose is indispensable and cannot be avoided, even when the tax effects are tightly intertwined with the act itself. In...

In this issue: Wills Trusts Older and at-risk clients UK taxation for Private Client HMRC Manual revisions Tax avoidance, evasion and non-compliance Private Client insolvency Disputed trusts and estates Art, heritage assets, landed estates and farming families Pensions, insurance and tax‑efficient investments Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland International Question of the week Further Private Client updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Lex Talk® Private Client: a Lexis+® community New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Useful information Wills Court upholds validity of 2008 Will ( Parfitt v Jones) The King’s Bench Division considered challenges to the 19 November 2008 will of Mary Barbara Wadge. It concluded that the claimant, Carolyne Hiddins, proved proper execution, testamentary capacity, and that the testatrix made the will freely and without undue influence. The court also rejected assertions that Mary did not know and approve the will’s terms. See Parfitt v Jones [2025] EWHC 1552 (...

See Q& A: Can a life tenant under a will trust validly and effectively assign their life interest by entering into a deed of variation pursuant to section 142 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984, despite the trustees having earlier exercised a power to advance capital to a beneficiary?......

Conservatory Insulations Northwest Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 705 ( TC) HMRC sought to have the appeal struck out on two bases: the FTT lacked jurisdiction to determine the point; and the appeal had no reasonable prospect of success. Both grounds hinged on HMRC’s stance about the timing of the assessment, which the FTT rejected. The appellant’s agent, acting on the company’s behalf, told HMRC about errors affecting VAT return periods that fell within the relevant window for notifying errors and raising assessments. It was accepted by both sides that the material provided to HMRC amounted to evidence of facts which, in HMRC’s view, was sufficient to warrant making the assessment, and that the relevant deadline for issuing the assessment was one year from the date HMRC had......

Osmond and Allen v HMRC [2025] UKUT 183 ( TCC) The taxpayers owned shares in a company that met the conditions for EIS disposal relief. In late 2014, worried that the EIS rules might be overhauled, they sought to lock in that relief while it was still available. Achieving this required triggering a CGT disposal, so they carried out share buy-backs. The price paid on the buy-backs was limited to no more than a return of capital, ensuring no income tax charge arose, and any CGT was removed by the EIS disposal relief. HMRC then issued counteraction notices under the transactions in securities ( Ti S) provisions, assessing the taxpayers to income tax on the basis that their main purpose in undertaking the buy-backs was to obtain an income tax advantage. Before the FTT, HMRC put forward two arguments. Its primary...

Smart v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 701 ( TC) The taxpayer was a member of a limited liability partnership within a Brazilian financial group (‘ BTG’) whose operations encompassed investment banking, advisory services, and wealth and asset management. On joining the partnership, he was required to acquire shares in various other group entities, with those acquisitions funded by loans advanced by connected entities. Several of these entities paid ‘interest on net equity’ (‘ JCP’) in respect of the shares he held. It was accepted that JCP is chargeable as a dividend from a non- UK company (section 402 of the Income Tax ( Trading and Other Income) Act 2005), or, where the paying vehicle is transparent for tax purposes, as property income ( ITTOIA 2005, ss 268–271). The dispute concerned JCP over three years which was either reinvested in additional shares or applied towards...

BGC Services Holdings LLP v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 700 ( TC) In March 2024, HMRC issued PAYE determinations exceeding £96m under SI 2003/2682, reg 80, concerning the salaried members rules (sections 863A–863G of the Income Tax ( Trading and Other Income) Act 2005) for the 2017–18 to 2019–20 tax years, stating that “the accompanying determination letters are self explanatory”. The taxpayer appealed to HMRC and then to the FTT, asserting that: the salaried member rules were not engaged even if they applied, the quantum was wrong extended assessment time limits (beyond four years) were unavailable, so 2017/18 and 2018/19 were not assessable HMRC had failed to particularise within the determinations why additional income tax was said to arise The taxpayer contended the determinations were defective and that no extra income tax was payable. HMRC applied to the FTT for directions that the taxpayer should provide further and better...

Rogers v Wills [2025] EWHC 1367 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision paints a bleak picture of brothers and sisters embroiled in a grave quarrel, arising after the death of their mother, about the estate she left. It further illustrates, across a broad spectrum of family situations, how informal understandings can readily crystallise into genuinely binding contracts, and how vanishingly small are the circumstances in which a plea that there was no intention to create legal relations will succeed in practice at all. Moreover, the ruling indicates that unjust enrichment may assume a materially important role in disputes where children of a deceased parent have provided later‑life care. Lastly, it reveals a degree of judicial flexibility when it comes to delineating the scope and content of the pleadings......

In this issue: Court of Protection Elderly and vulnerable clients UK taxes for Private Client HMRC Manuals updates Tax avoidance, evasion and non-compliance Contentious trusts and estates Art and heritage property, landed estates and farming families Pensions, insurance and tax efficient investments International Question of the week Additional Private Client updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Lex Talk®Private Client: a Lexis+® community New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& A Useful information Court of Protection Court of Protection authorises planned C-section as being in P’s best interests ( Oxford University NHS Foundation Trust v AX) The Court of Protection determined an application concerning AX, a pregnant patient detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 for depression and psychosis. It concluded that a...

See Q& A: Which steps might a life tenant holding a portion of a trust fund take to pass her life interest on to her own children?...

Candy v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2025] UKFTT 416 ( TC) What are the practical implications of this case? The clearest consequence of the ruling concerns taxpayers seeking to recover overpaid SDLT who have missed the 12‑month amendment period in section 44. In defined circumstances, it opens a route to reclaim genuine overpayments within a four‑year window. That does not mean paragraph [34] displaces the requirement in section 44; the FTT confirmed as much. HMRC may still contest such claims, subject to the particular facts. The effect of the decision reaches beyond SDLT to overpayment relief in general. The tribunal’s attention to the full suite of materials around the legislation, in order to reach its view, emphasises the breadth of interpretation available for the overpayment provisions and their purpose. Crucially, the judgment should not be treated as a shortcut to ignoring the guidance in...

In this issue: Wills Court of Protection Elderly and vulnerable clients UK taxes for Private Client HMRC Manuals tracker Tax avoidance, evasion and non-compliance Budgets and Finance Bills Insolvency— Private Client Charity and philanthropy Contentious trusts and estates Pensions, insurance and tax efficient investments Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland International Question of the week Additional Private Client updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Lex Talk®Private Client: a Lexis+® community New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Useful information Wills Modernising Wills—final report recommendations to modernise Wills law to promote testamentary freedom On 16 May 2025, the Law Commission released its concluding report, Modernising Wills Law. Authored by Matthew Duncan, partner and head of Private Wealth at Druces LLP. See News...

Recommendations to modernise wills law to promote testamentary freedom The purpose is to update the rules on wills so they are suitable for today. The concluding report sets out a draft Bill intended to replace the Wills Act 1837 ( WA 1837). What are the plans over this being retrospective/active? The draft new Wills Act would revise the existing framework, carrying across provisions from the WA 1837 and drawing together other will-related rules from separate statutes into a single, consolidated Act. What did the Law Commission miss in undertaking this review? The Law Commission stopped short of proposing mandatory registration of wills, which many may regard as a missed chance for reform. What should practitioners do with existing Wills? Until any reforms are enacted and a new Wills Act is on the statute book, practitioners should continue preparing and drafting clients’ wills in accordance with the current WA...

The Keepers and Governors of the Possessions, Revenues and Goods of the Free Grammar School of John Lyon, Within the Town of Harrow- On- The- Hill v His Majesty’s Attorney General [2025] EWHC 849 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This was the second time the matter came before the court. At the earlier hearing, the court revisited the settled rule that its scheme-making jurisdiction cannot be used in a way that contradicts a Royal Charter or an Act of Parliament, but only to support or enhance such instruments. Royal Charters and Acts are treated as emanating from a ‘higher authority’ and, as such, must not be altered unless any modification is itself sanctioned by an Act or Charter. At that first stage, both parties took the view that this ‘higher authority principle’ was not engaged, reasoning that the...