12 Apr 2018
Leave to appeal is refused because the applicant has not demonstrated a sufficiently apparent error; the Courts below made concurrent findings that the solicitor was not negligent and, alternatively, that any negligence did not cause the asserted loss, and the material does not raise sufficient doubt on causation to justify granting leave.
29 Sept 2015
The deed of acknowledgment of debt was a clear, binding written agreement admitting indebtedness and repayable on demand; parol evidence could not be used to contradict the deed, there was no arguable case that the deed was a sham, and the defendant failed to show a substantial ground of defence such that setting aside the summary judgment was required.
30 Apr 2009
The Court held that (1) an act need not satisfy the general part of the 1968 Act's definition to be a 'disposition of property' because the lettered 'includes' paragraphs are self-contained; (2) the execution of the Public Trust deeds created trusts impressing the donors' homes with trust obligations and therefore constituted immediate dutiable gifts to the beneficiaries under the statute (following Perry); and (3) subsequent gifts under the deed can each amount to separate dispositions by creation of further trusts.
28 Feb 2008
The court held the deeds did not create dutiable gifts under the 1968 Act because the creation of a trust is a subset of the statutory "disposition of property" and must attach to the same subject matter as the gift; these deeds settled existing real property only as the source for a future cash payment and therefore related to future property and incomplete obligations rather than present dispositions of the gifted cash, so the Commissioner's decisions were upheld.
7 Nov 2005
The Statement of Claim was struck out because the plaintiff lacked legal status to bring the claim—he was neither donor nor donee, the donor company was in liquidation and any relevant rights vested in the Official Assignee under s42 Insolvency Act 1967—and therefore had no standing; alternatively the proceeding amounted to an abuse of process. Although the valuation regime in s68A might apply to an easement in gross, that potential legal point cannot save a claim brought by a party without the requisite statutory status.