header-logo header-logo

24 April 2017 / Elis Gomer
Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

A cause for concern

The government's controversial plans to hike up probate fees bore the hallmark of a tax, says Elis Gomer

A cursory glance through the Ministry of Justice’s (MoJ’s) press releases on the now defunct hike in probate fees demonstrates that the government was presenting the changes as ‘fair’ and ‘progressive’.

In particular, there was emphasis on the point that over half of estates would not pay any fee at all (58% of estates are worth below £50,000, the suggested lower limit) and on the fact that the new fees would increase with the value of the estate rather than being a flat fee.

The reality is that the proposals were anything but progressive. Dig deeper into the ministerial commentary and you will find the revelation that the main driver for these changes is that the MoJ has identified a ‘need’ for a new source of funding for the courts. Heaven forfend that we should view a functioning court system as a cornerstone of society and something worth funding in its own right. No, the ministerial rhetoric is that

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

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll