header-logo header-logo

10 December 2018 / Gregor Hogan
Issue: 7821 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Gifts with reservations

​Gregor Hogan reports on the lessons from Viscount Hood v HMRC & what constitutes a gift with reservation of benefit

  • The judgment is a reminder that this area of law remains complex and particularly sensitive to the facts of each case.
  • Practitioners should remain careful when using precedents to consider how changes may affect the legal position.

In Viscount Hood v HMRC [2018] EWCA Civ 2405 the Court of Appeal considered the extensive case law on s 102(1)(b) of the Finance Act 1986, ie gifts with reservations, where a revisionary long sub-lease had been granted subject to positive covenants. It provides a useful overview of the authorities but should also prompt practitioners to give careful consideration to whether any steps can be taken to mitigate the tax consequences of such impugned schemes.

Background

The factual background was, for the Court of Appeal’s purposes, rather simple. Lady Hood owned a 97-year lease (the headlease) of 67 and 67A Chelsea Square (the property). The headlease contained a number of usual covenants, for example to repair and

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll