Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Vandervell v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1967] 2 AC 291 is a leading English trusts law case, concerning resulting trusts. It demonstrates that the mere intention to not have a resulting trust (for example, to avoid taxes) does not make it so. This case was the first in a series of decisions involving Tony Vandervell's trusts and his tax ...
Re Vandervell Trustees Ltd [1971] AC 912 is a UK tax law case, concerning the ability of the Revenue to amend tax assessments. This case was the second in a series of decisions involving Tony Vandervell's trusts and his tax liability.
When this occurs, the property is held on resulting trust for the settlor, as in Vandervell v IRC. [17] This also occurs where a trust is formed over property which requires formality, but is improperly created (for example, a land transfer that does not adhere to the Law of Property Act 1925). [18]
Former CBS News reporter Catherine Herridge said that there’s a precedent for her former employer to release a full transcript, citing her own interview with former President Trump in 2020 ...
The first was Vandervell v Inland Revenue Commissioners, [1] where the House of Lords was concerned with whether an oral instruction to transfer an equitable interest in shares complied with the writing requirement under Law of Property Act 1925 section 53(1)(c), and so whether receipt of dividends was subject to tax.
The lawsuit, filed in Cole County by the Missouri Broadcasters Association, two attorneys and William Freivogel, editor of the Gateway Journalism Review, asks for the courts to overturn the law ...
More than 20 Republican-led states have banned or restricted abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 reversed Roe v. Wade, the court's 1973 precedent that had established a right to abortion ...
It is important to stress that this is only a presumption, which presumption is easily rebutted either by the counter- presumption of advancement or by direct evidence of A's intention to make an outright transfer: see Underhill and Hayton (supra) p. 317 et seq.; Vandervell v IRC [1967] 2 AC 291 at 312 et seq.;