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

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll