Beneficiary Definition

Case studies

"LexisPSL and the other Lexis solutions support our business in exactly the way we want. They enable us to quickly turn around work and deliver the best possible service to our clients."

SBP Law

Access all documents on Beneficiary

GET ACCESS NOW

GLOSSARY

Published by a ��˾��ҹ�� Private Client expert

What does Beneficiary mean?

A person who has a interest'>beneficial interest in property under a trust.

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

EU and UK Wire Transfer Regulations—timeline to 31 December 2023 [Archived]

EU and UK Wire Transfer Regulations—timeline to 31 December 2023 [Archived] ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is no longer maintained. For UK developments see: AML/CTF/CPF—timeline of UK legal and regulatory developments for financial services. For EU developments see: AML/CTF/CPF—timeline of EU legal and regulatory developments for financial services. This timeline outlines the developments in relation to the Wire Transfer Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2015/847) (also known as the Funds Transfer Regulation (FTR)), its predecessor the Wire Transfer Regulation (Regulation (EU) 1781/2006) and the Recast EU WTR2 (also referred to as the Recast EU Transfer of Funds Regulation (EU FTR2)) which entered into force in June 2023 and applies from 30 December 2024 and forms part of the wider European Commission 2021 legislative package overhauling the European Union’s AML/CTF legal framework and regulatory requirements. It further includes the onshoring of EU WTR2 through the Retained Regulation (EU) 2015/847 (UK WTR2) and relevant updates brought in through the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017,...

Which EU Member State court has jurisdiction?—checklist

Which EU Member State court has jurisdiction?—checklist This Checklist is for use when determining which EU Member State’s courts have jurisdiction to determine a dispute. It does this by considering the articles in Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) that are applied to determine which court has jurisdiction to determine the dispute. The general rule is that a defendant should be sued in the courts of the EU Member State in which they are domiciled. However, a number of articles derogate from this rule. Some derogations are mandatory, while and others apply if the claimant seeks to rely on that provision. The articles are applied in the hierarchy set out in the table below. If the first article listed is not applicable, the next article should be considered to see if that is applicable and so on. Determining jurisdiction Type of jurisdiction Consideration Mandatory/by choice Brussels I (recast) Exclusive jurisdiction Certain prescribed circumstances provide for the courts of an EU Member State to have jurisdiction regardless of...

Discover our 57 Checklists on Beneficiary

Cross-border inheritance tax issues

Cross-border inheritance tax issues FORTHCOMING CHANGE: Abolition of non-dom regime and introduction of residence-based IHT regime. At Autumn Budget 2024 on 30 October 2024, the Labour government confirmed that it will proceed with plans of the former Conservative administration to abolish the remittance basis of taxation and replace it with a residence-based regime, to commence on 6 April 2025. The government also confirmed its intention to move to a residence-based regime for inheritance tax. The changes will also affect the rules determining excluded property status, the Abolition of protected settlements status of offshore trusts, and changes to overseas workday relief. For information on these changes, including draft legislation published with Autumn Budget 2024, see: Autumn Budget 2024—Private Client analysis — International, Autumn Budget 2024 (paras 2.56 and 5.51), OOTLAR (para 1.3) and TIIN: Reforming the taxation of non-UK domiciled individuals. This Practice Note covers UK inheritance tax (IHT) issues in cross-border situations and deals with: actual and deemed domicile; double tax treaties and ...

Recognition of judgments under Brussels I (recast)

Recognition of judgments under Brussels I (recast) This Practice Note considers the provisions in Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) dealing with the recognition of judgments. It sets out the general provisions and then looks in some detail at the grounds on which recognition might be refused followed by how to make an application requesting that the court refuses to recognise the judgment. For guidance on enforcement of judgments, see Practice Note: Enforcement of judgments under Brussels I (recast). What is a judgment? For the definition of what constitutes a ‘judgment’ of an EU Member State for the purposes of recognition under Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), see Practice Note: Enforcement of default judgments under Brussels I (recast). Recognition of a judgment The usual position, set out in Article 36(1) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), is that a judgment given in one EU Member State is recognised in another EU Member State without any special procedure being required. There is no need to bring an application for...

Discover our 1160 Practice Notes on Beneficiary

Clause—for use where trustees are exercising powers of appointment in a settlement—appointing the trust fund in favour of a beneficiary absolutely

Clause—for use where trustees are exercising powers of appointment in a settlement—appointing the trust fund in favour of a beneficiary absolutely The Trustees

Contingent trust of capital and income at a specific age—clause

Contingent trust of capital and income at a specific age—clause The Trustees shall hold the Trust Fund and the income

Dive into our 234 Precedents related to Beneficiary

How does a company remove a charge from the charges register at Companies House that has already been released if the beneficiary of the charge is a dissolved company or has been taken over by another company?

How does a company remove a charge from the charges register at Companies House that has already been released if the beneficiary of the charge is a dissolved company or has been taken over by another company? There is no statutory requirement for a chargor to notify Companies House that it has either fully or partially satisfied a debt or had its security released. However, such notification will be in the best interests of the chargor so that any potential investors and lenders are aware that the debt has been satisfied and/or its assets are unencumbered. Where a charge has been released in full, to notify Companies House, the chargor should submit form MR04 (Statement of satisfaction in

Is a guarantee effective where it has been executed and dated by the guarantor but not executed by the beneficiary of the guarantee? Can the beneficiary sign the document some time after the execution by the guarantor?

Is a guarantee effective where it has been executed and dated by the guarantor but not executed by the beneficiary of the guarantee? Can the beneficiary sign the document some time after the execution by the guarantor? Offer, acceptance and certainty of terms See Practice Note: Formalities for creating a guarantee which explains that the following features are required to create an effective guarantee: • offer and acceptance, with the intention to create legal relations, and • sufficient certainty of terms For more information in relation to each of these features, see Practice Notes: Forming enforceable contracts—offer, Forming enforceable contracts—acceptance, Forming enforceable contracts—intention to create legal relations and Forming enforceable contracts—certainty. And for further reading on this point, see commentaries: • Making the agreement: Halsbury's Laws of England [648] • The principle: Halsbury's Laws of England [652] Parties and signatures In order to satisfy the Statute of Frauds 1677, all of the parties to the guarantee must be named or sufficiently described in writing. The guarantee must...

See the 1119 Q&As about Beneficiary

Revoking a Will—where tearing with the authorised assistance of the testator’s solicitor will suffice; and where the evidence of the solicitor as to capacity will trump the opinion of a non-cross-examined jointly instructed single expert (Crew v Oakley)

Private Client analysis: The court found that (i) the deceased had, with the assistance of her solicitor, effectively revoked her last Will by destruction with the requisite intent, and, despite the conclusion drawn by the parties’ single joint expert who was not cross-examined, (ii) on the basis of the solicitor’s evidence the deceased had the requisite capacity to revoke her Will, such that her estate passed to her sister on an intestacy. Written by Oliver Hilton, barrister at Radcliffe Chambers, Lincoln’s Inn.

Private Client weekly highlights—13 March 2025

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) Ashimola v Samuel, an unusual probate case involving allegations of fraud, forgery, and impersonation; (2) the Office of the Public Guardian issues guidance on Court of Protection deputies’ approach to family care payments; (3) R (on the application of VRP, a protected party, by her litigation friend SR) v The Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames, which considered a local authority’s duty to provide same-sex carers; (4) HMRC has published a new version of the IHT grossing up calculator; and (5) Louwman v Revenue and Customs Commissioners, which held that offshore income gains and accrued income profits of a taxpayer were not ‘protected foreign source income’ under the transfer of assets abroad regime.

Read the latest 1568 News articles on Beneficiary

Top

Trial

��˾��ҹ��

GLOSSARY