header-logo header-logo

12 September 2014 / Roderick Ramage
Issue: 7621 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

It’s e-material!

Roderick Ramage discusses the property characteristics of “e-material” & shares a new precedent

Computer hardware is a personal chattel as defined in the Administration of Estates Act 1925, s 55(2)(x) as altered from 1 October 2014 by the Inheritance and Trustees’ Powers Act 2014, but not if used by the deceased solely or mainly for business purposes. The physical devices (memory sticks, CDs, floppy discs, external hard discs etc) are capable also of being personal chattels, again subject to the business test. The programs and all data files (documents, images, sound etc), even if stored on a computer or a device which is a personal chattel, cannot be personal chattels, because they are not tangible property. The programs accessed in the cloud (almost certainly) and the data placed in the cloud files (quite possibly but still unsettled) are not the property of the person who uses them and, in the case of data files placed them there; see work by Queen Mary University of London. Therefore, the property characteristics of “e-material” are not altogether clear

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll