header-logo header-logo

29 May 2010
Issue: 7419 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Time-bar ends brotherly squabble

A 13-year dispute between two brothers over a Devonshire farm left in a will has ended

A 13-year dispute between two brothers over a Devonshire farm left in a will has ended after the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal for being time-barred.

In Roberts v Gill & Co Solicitors and others [2010] UKSC 22, Mark Roberts and his brother John were beneficiaries of a will made by their grandmother, Alice Roberts. The will provided that if John paid all the inheritance tax due then a farm would pass to him, while another property would pass to his brother.

When the grandmother died, John paid some but not all of the inheritance tax, transferred ownership of the farm to himself, as administrator of the estate, and then sold it and used the proceeds to pay the remainder of the tax. Mark brought a legal claim against his brother and his brother’s solicitors, the two separate firms of Gill & Co and Whitehead Vizard.

The claim was framed in such a way as to allege that the duty of care was owed by the firms of solicitors to the appellant, Mark Roberts, personally. However, the correct legal position is that the duty of care is owed to the estate of the deceased. A beneficiary can only bring a claim where “special circumstances” exist.

The appellant applied to amend his claim to continue it on behalf of the estate. However, the justices ruled the amendment was time-barred under s 35 of the Limitation Act 1980.
 

Issue: 7419 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll