Payne & Anor v Tyler & Anor

Payne & Anor v Tyler & Anor

The trustees acted under a fundamental mistake as to the inheritance tax consequences of the deed of appointment, which was central to the transaction and resulted in significant unintended tax liability. It would be unconscionable to leave the mistake uncorrected; therefore, rescission is granted.

Parties
Claimant: Nicholas Henry Payne; Claimant: James Michael Rowland Alston; Defendant: Sarah Tyler; Defendant: Heather Alston
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim / Judgment on Application for Rescission of Deed
Outcome
Claim allowed; deed of appointment rescinded
Legal Topics
Rescission for Mistake, Inheritance Tax, Deed of Appointment, Equitable Relief

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicholas Henry Payne

Claimant

James Michael Rowland Alston

Claimant

Sarah Tyler

Defendant

Heather Alston

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim / Judgment on Application for Rescission of Deed

  1. 1 Whether the deed of appointment dated 6 April 2012 should be rescinded on the grounds of mistake
  2. 2 Whether the mistake was sufficiently serious and central to the transaction to warrant equitable relief

Ratio Decidendi

The trustees acted under a fundamental mistake as to the inheritance tax consequences of the deed of appointment, which was central to the transaction and resulted in significant unintended tax liability. It would be unconscionable to leave the mistake uncorrected; therefore, rescission is granted.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; deed of appointment rescinded

Orders

  • Rescission of the deed of appointment dated 6 April 2012