In AEA 1925 s55 (1)(x) the definition of chattels excludes 3 categories of property, the last two of which refer to the intestate. Since Will precedents often use the definition by reference to AEA 1925 s55 (1)(x), what if there is no intestate? Are the last 2 categories of property not excluded if no intestate? Normally when drafting a Will the intention is that there would be no intestacy but a partial intestacy may arise by chance.
The definition was amended by the Inheritance and Trustee Powers Act 2014, to which any new will refers.
Paul Saunders FCIB TEP
Independent Trust Consultant
Providing support and advice to fellow professionals
I agree that the definition was amended by the 2014 Act, but the new definition refers to “the intestate” in 2 out of 3 categories of property. I cannot see why and does this cause a problem depending on whether the deceased is an intestate?
regards
Richard Mugford
I apologise – I was a bit too quick of the mark.
Having done a quick look at sources available to me, either the point about “intestate” is not touched upon or, if it is, then it is only by reference to an intestacy and not a will.
“Intestate” in AEA 55(1)(vi) “includes a person who leaves a will but dies intestate as to some beneficial interest in his real or personal estate”, so no real help.
I wonder if our more learned friends might be able to explain
Paul Saunders FCIB TEP
Independent Trust Consultant
Providing support and advice to fellow professionals
This has always been a thoroughly lazy incorporation by reference and no excuse for not defining “personal chattels” exhaustively, although some reference to the Act itself would presumably incorporate the case law, though some of it is quixotic and a problem for unincorporated businesses generally and assets used only partly for business. If the provision is incorporated wholesale my view would be that the references to “intestate” are just redundant and of no effect on the definition of ““Personal chattels” means tangible movable property, other than any such property which—consists of money or securities for money”. And no clarification of what is a business or business asset.
Jack Harper
Can’t find any specific authority on the point despite a number of cases on the definition.
Prima facie, it would seem that reference to “intestate” in any cross-reference to s55(1)(x) “personal chattels” in a will should simply be ignored.
The pre-modified (ie pre ITPA 2014) definition of “personal chattels” applies to wills executed before October 2014. However, wrt to intestacy the post-modified definition applies.
Malcolm Finney
I agree with Jack Harper that it is (and was) somewhat lazy to incorporate the statutory definition into a will without expressly providing that the reference to ‘the death of the intestate’ should be read as referring to the death of the testator. But I think that the incorporated definition (old or new) would be construed in that way even without express provision (whether or not there was a partial intestacy).
Alexander Learmonth QC
New Square Chambers
Many thanks.
Richard Mugford