Bourne v Lloyds Tsb Bank Plc & Anor

Bourne v Lloyds Tsb Bank Plc & Anor

The applicant failed to demonstrate any real prospect of success on any ground. The judge below was entitled to appoint Lloyds Bank as executor, found no credible evidence of an inter vivos gift of property number 48, and made no consequential orders regarding jointly owned properties. There was no error of law or fact warranting permission to appeal.

Parties
First Respondent/claimant: Ms Allayne Bourne; Second Respondent/first Defendant: Lloyds TSB Bank PLC; Applicant/second Defendant: Mr Jeremy Alfred Blacker
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Renewed application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Executorship, Inter Vivos Gifts, Probate, Conflict of Interest, Beneficial Ownership
Succession Trusts and Estates Executorship Inter Vivos Gifts Probate Conflict of Interest Beneficial Ownership

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Allayne Bourne

First Respondent/claimant

Lloyds TSB Bank PLC

Second Respondent/first Defendant

Mr Jeremy Alfred Blacker

Applicant/second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in appointing Lloyds TSB Bank PLC as sole executor of the estate
  2. 2 Whether there was an inter vivos gift of property number 48 to Mr Blacker
  3. 3 Whether findings regarding jointly owned properties with Rosa Jones were erroneous

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any real prospect of success on any ground. The judge below was entitled to appoint Lloyds Bank as executor, found no credible evidence of an inter vivos gift of property number 48, and made no consequential orders regarding jointly owned properties. There was no error of law or fact warranting permission to appeal.

Court Disposition

Renewed application for permission to appeal refused