header-logo header-logo

2019: claims to fame

23 October 2019 / Constance McDonnell KC
Issue: 7861 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail
9856
Constance McDonnell QC examines the year’s most notable 1975 Act decisions
  • The use of standstill agreements to prevent a claim having to be issued within six months of a grant of representation.
  • The quantification of claims where medical costs are a principal financial need.
  • Applications for interim relief.

2019 has been something of a momentous year so far for practitioners who deal with claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975), with the decision of Mostyn J in Cowan v Foreman [2019] EWHC 349 (Fam) casting doubt over the widely-used practice of ‘standstill agreements’ so as to prevent a claim having to be issued within six months of a grant of representation and to facilitate settlement discussions. The expedited decision of the Court of Appeal in that case should do much to settle concerns about continued use of such agreements, and has clarified the court’s approach to late claims. There has also been some helpful guidance from the court about the quantification of claims

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll