Kohli v Proles

Kohli v Proles

The Master correctly found that Baldev Kohli had acquired a domicile of choice in England and Wales by 2010 and had not abandoned it before his death, as there was strong contemporaneous evidence of his intention to return to England and no sufficient evidence of abandonment. The criticisms raised do not disclose any real prospect of success on appeal.

Parties
Defendant/appellant: Harjeet Kaur Kohli; Claimant/respondent: Miss Amélie Pearl Lily Proles (a minor by her mother and litigation friend, Melissa Proles)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Oral Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Domicile of Choice, Abandonment of Domicile, Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act, Appeal Procedure
Succession Law Private International Law Domicile of Choice Abandonment of Domicile Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act Appeal Procedure

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 (a minor by her mother and litigation friend, Melissa Proles)

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Oral Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the deceased, Baldev Kohli, died domiciled in England and Wales or India
  2. 2 Whether the Master erred in her assessment of domicile of choice and abandonment
  3. 3 Whether the Master failed to make proper findings on sole or chief residence, intention regarding last days, effect of visa status, and relevant dates

Ratio Decidendi

The Master correctly found that Baldev Kohli had acquired a domicile of choice in England and Wales by 2010 and had not abandoned it before his death, as there was strong contemporaneous evidence of his intention to return to England and no sufficient evidence of abandonment. The criticisms raised do not disclose any real prospect of success on appeal.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal is refused