Kohli v Proles [2019] EWHC 193 (Ch) (06 February 2019)

Kohli v Proles [2019] EWHC 193 (Ch) (06 February 2019)

The Master correctly found that the deceased had acquired a domicile of choice in England by 2010 and had not abandoned it before his death, as contemporaneous evidence showed intention to return to England and no sufficient evidence of abandonment; none of the appellant's grounds demonstrated a real prospect of success.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 193 (Ch)
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Harjeet Kaur Kohli; Claimant/respondent: Miss Amélie Pearl Lily Proles
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Renewed Oral Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Domicile, Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, Abandonment of Domicile, Permission to Appeal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harjeet Kaur Kohli

Defendant/appellant

Miss Amélie Pearl Lily Proles

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Renewed Oral Application for Permission to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the deceased died domiciled in England and Wales or India
  2. 2 Whether the deceased abandoned his English domicile of choice
  3. 3 Whether the Master erred in assessing the deceased's intentions regarding residence

Ratio Decidendi

The Master correctly found that the deceased had acquired a domicile of choice in England by 2010 and had not abandoned it before his death, as contemporaneous evidence showed intention to return to England and no sufficient evidence of abandonment; none of the appellant's grounds demonstrated a real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal is refused; the Master's judgment stands.