Justice for Danny Major, Finally?

On 11th December 2015, the long awaited report of the Greater Manchester Police review of Danny's case was delivered to the West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, Mark Burns-Williamson.

In a statement, Mr Burns-Williamson said the following:

"What the report does say is that, in the opinion of the investigating team, the evidence supports the premise that there may have been a miscarriage of justice and that there is sufficient 'fresh evidence' to support the case being referred back to the Criminal Case Review Commission (CCRC)."

To read the full statement, click HERE

On 21st December, Danny's case featured on Channel 4 News, to view the video, click HERE

Danny is represented by Maslen Merchant of Hadgkiss Hughes and Beale, who has been working on the case for 8 years.

A request for an urgent review, and referral of Danny's case back to the Court of Appeal, was submitted to the CCRC on 14th December. A substantive response is awaited.

To contact the criminal department at Hadgkiss Hughes and Beale email enquiries@hhb-mo.co.uk or telephone 0121 449 5050

No further press statements will be issued at this time.





Murder Conviction of Mark Dorling referred to Court of Appeal

              

The Criminal Cases Review Commission has referred the murder conviction of Mark Dorling to the Court of Appeal.

"Mr Dorling was tried at the Central Criminal Court in London in 2006 for the murder of Aaron Chapman. He pleaded not guilty but was convicted on 19th April and sentenced to life imprisonment with a tariff of 25 years.

Aaron Chapman, a former prison officer, was attacked with a knife at his Surrey home in December 2002.  The following day he died from multiple stab wounds.

Mr Dorling sought to appeal against his conviction but his appeal was dismissed. He applied to the Commission for a review of his conviction in March 2012.

Having considered the case in detail, the Commission has decided to refer Mr Dorling’s murder conviction to the Court of Appeal. The referral is based new information that has emerged since the trial, and on other evidence that was available at the time of the trial but that was not disclosed to the defence. The Commission considers that this material raises a real possibility that the Court of Appeal will now quash the conviction.

Mr Dorling is represented by Mr Maslen Merchant of Hadgkiss Hughes and Beale, 83 Alcester Road, Birmingham B13 8EB."

This press release was issued by Justin Hawkins, Head of Communication, Criminal Cases Review Commission, on 0121 232 0906 or e-mail.

30th October 2015

Murder Conviction of Jamie Dunn referred to Court of Appeal

 


           

The Criminal Cases Review Commission has referred the murder conviction

of James Lee Dunn to the Court of Appeal.

"Mr Dunn appeared at Birmingham Crown Court in July 2006 along with four other men charged with murder on the basis of joint enterprise.

He pleaded not guilty but was convicted for the murdering a man who was who was shot multiple times and with two guns in a pub car park in Coventry in April 2005. Mr Dunn was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 26 years.

Mr Dunn appealed against his conviction but the appeal was dismissed in June 2009. He applied to the Commission for a review of his case in September 2013.

Having considered the case in detail, the Commission has decided to refer Mr Dunn’s conviction to the Court of Appeal. The referral is based on previously undisclosed material relating to the reliability of a prosecution witness which raises the real possibility that the Court of Appeal will now quash the conviction.

Mr Dunn is represented by Mr Maslen Merchant of Hadgkiss Hughes and Beale, 83 Alcester Road, Birmingham B13 8EB."

26th October 2015

This press release was issued by Justin Hawkins, Head of Communication, Criminal Cases Review Commission, on 0121 232 0906 or e-mail

The Importance of Full and Frank Disclosure in Divorce Settlements

 

The Supreme Court has handed down judgments in the cases of Sharland v Sharland [2015] UKSC 60 and Gohil v Gohil [2015] UKSC 61.

 

The rulings highlight the importance of spouses providing full and frank financial disclosure to ensure a fair financial settlement.  It sends out a firm message to everyone going through  divorce that they cannot mislead or lie in the family courts and expect to get away with it. Dishonesty or fraud involving failure to disclose financial assets are grounds for renegotiating previously resolved disagreements.  The rulings are likely to prompt some aggrieved ex-spouses to reconsider final orders and to start legal actions.

 

Both women in the above cases took their claims to the Supreme Court in London to establish that non-disclosure in divorce settlements requires a case to be re-examined. Their ex-husbands disagreed.

 

For details of the cases and full text of the Supreme Court’s judgments, please click here.

 

 

To discuss the impact the above decisions may have upon you if you are already divorced, or in the process of divorce, contact Katie Ward or Hardip Lall-Jones in our Family Department via enquiries@hhb-mo.co.uk  or 0121 449 5050.

 

 

We offer a free, no obligation, half hour appointment to discuss whatever family issues you have and also to consider the most appropriate cost package available.

The Case of Heather Ilott - Excluding Family Members from your Will

Many of you have been contacting us with concerns about how the recent case of Heather Ilott (see post on Blog dated 28th July 2015) affects Wills you have made, or are thinking of making, in which you exclude a close family member. Particularly in this case one of your children.

 

Although English Law carries no specific rules about how people should dispose of their estates there have long been laws that protected family members who had been unreasonably disinherited. The most recent of those is the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

 

One of the categories of the family that has some protection is children.

 

When Heather Ilott’s mother left her nothing and gave her entire estate to charities the issues in the law were decided by senior judges in the Court of Appeal.

 

The decision in favour of Ms Ilott appears to fly in the face of how most lawyers had been interpreting the law and to make it much easier for disinherited children to stake claims.

 

Over the next few years there will, no doubt, be more cases which help to set the guidelines more clearly but at the moment when we make Wills we must work with the new situation.

I always ask new clients to tell me about their families and in particular I am looking to see if any likely claimant under the 1975 Act is not getting what might be “reasonable provision”.

 

In such cases I try to find out why the client has made this decision. There are usually very good reasons. I advise the client about the potential risk of a claim and sometimes the client makes changes in the Will to try to avoid future conflict.

A good lawyer will make sure that a proper record is made of the reasons for the client’s decision.

This could be written in the Will, it could be put into a signed statement, it could be signed on my notes or it could be recorded in my letter to the client.

The decision in Ilott means that I will be advising a great many more statements.

The statement will need to address the issues highlighted in the Ilott case.

The first is why the person is being left out.

The second is to establish the lifestyle that the affected person has. The Ilott case was about raising Ms Ilott’s standard of life to what the judges thought was “reasonable”. How does that point fit into my client’s circumstances?

The third is to explain why the parties who have taken the share instead should have it. In the Ilott case the mother who made the Will had no real connection with the charities she gave the money to. It might have been a very different outcome if she had been a lifelong supporter of them or if she had had some substantial support from them, for example from a charity such as Macmillan.

If I need to attend on the client to prepare and write up the statement there will have to be a charge which will depend on the time taken, probably at least £50.

However the client may feel that they can set out all the facts in a statement themselves in which case there would be no charge for storing the statement with the Will.

These are early days for the legal profession in reacting to this case but I hope these few words are of some assistance.

The essential message is the same as in my other piece about Wills:

Use a solicitor, preferably one who has been recommended to you.

 

 

To contact Roger call our Moseley office on 0121 449 5050

or email enquiries@hhb-mo.co.uk

Beware - if your Will is not written well the Courts can overrule it!

 

In the recent case of Heather Ilott (v Mitson and others [2015] EWCA Civ 797) the Court of Appeal overruled  Melita Jackson’s Will which left her £500,000 estate to animal charities.

 

The Court awarded Heather Ilott £164,000 from her estranged mother’s estate despite the fact that her mother had expressly stated in the Will that she did not want her daughter to receive anything.

 

To read the judgment from the case click here

 

This ruling means that although people can still disinherit their children, their Will must show a good reason why and explain what connects them to the people or organisations that they have included in their wills instead.

 

Regardless of what you write in your Will, it can be overturned if it is not written clearly and in enough detail to satisfy the Courts.

 

The message is clear - see a Solicitor and have your Will drawn up professionally to be sure your wishes are carried out.

 

 

To discuss making a Will, or any concerns you may have about an existing Will, please contact our Wills and Probate department on 0121 449 5050 or via enquiries@hhb-mo.co.uk.

Landmark Ruling on Financial Provision

Landmark Ruling on Financial Provision

The recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of Wyatt v Vince [2015] UKSC 14 highlights how important it is to obtain a financial Consent Order during divorce, in order to finalise the proceedings.

 

The court ruled that the passage of time (in this case 22 years) did not prevent a claim being brought by a woman against her ex husband for financial provision.

 

To read the judgment from the case click here

  

To discuss any concerns you may have please contact our family department via enquiries@hhb-mo.co.uk  or by telephone on 0121 449 5050.

Making a Will

A Personal Note from Roger Mallatratt

While my note about LPAs suggested that those who want to take the time and trouble can make their own I very strongly advise clients that they should have their Wills prepared professionally.

 

A Will is not a form; it is a blank sheet in which you have to set down exactly what you want to happen to your estate when you die. It only becomes a valid document on your death at which point there will be nothing you can do to correct any mistakes.

 

The starting point is to assess in broad terms what you own at the moment and how your estate would be distributed if you died reasonably soon. It is quite easy to get even that first stage wrong. For example, many people see their jointly owned house as belonging equally to each party forgetting that the law of survivorship means that on the first death the entire property passes automatically to the other.

 

The next stage is to start to consider, as far as you can, what you might own if you die some years in the future. Might you have had an inheritance? Might you need residential care which could  result in your house having been sold before you die?

 

Giving a house to a family member in your Will might go completely wrong for that person if the house was no longer yours when you died.

 

Family life is much more complicated than it was; many people are in second marriages or partnerships and one or both have children from other relationships. That usually needs some thinking about.

 

Who are you going to appoint as executors? Usually these can be drawn from immediate family. There is generally no need for the solicitors or a Will writing company to be executors. Such appointments lead to increased and unnecessary cost for your estate.

 

I do not advise clients to appoint us as executors unless there is some very good reason for doing so.

 

We do not charge a massive fee which allegedly incorporates Probate work. We charge reasonably for the Will, we do not charge for storing it and we make no charge for getting it out of storage and handing it to your executors when the time comes. If your executors want help from our excellent Probate Department they can have it but there is no obligation or hard sell.

 

These are just a few of the areas that I and my colleagues at Hadgkiss will help you to deal with when we are making your Will. I am delighted to work with such a friendly firm and hope to be of service to you.

 

To contact Roger please call our Moseley office on

0121 449 5050 or email enquiries@hhb-mo.co.uk

 

Lasting Powers of Attorney

 

A personal note from Roger Mallatratt

If you have got this far in your research you probably have an interest in obtaining a LPA for yourself or for a relative and will have a pretty good idea of what it means.

 

You will be aware of what is almost a barrage of recommendation for LPAs from the Press, Government and on radio and TV. They really do make sense.

 

The Office of the Public Guardian website is excellent. It has all the forms you need and loads of information. If you want to do so you can prepare and register them for yourself.

 

I am one of the lawyers at Hadgkiss to whom LPA enquiries are directed. I have been writing them since they began about 7 years ago and I have over 30 years of legal experience behind me.

 

This is not the place to persuade you to have an LPA. It is just a few notes looking at some of the points that arise.

 

The first thing to say is that it is not essential to use a solicitor. The LPA and the other papers involved are all forms. They just have to be completed properly; the rules are on the OPG website and are the same rules that we use. What a solicitor offers is the experience to avoid mistakes, guidance on the few questions that the forms raise and, perhaps of most importance, the saving of the time and responsibility.

 

We offer a fixed price which includes the making of the LPA and all the necessary steps to include registration.

 

I always advise clients to have more than one attorney if possible and if that does not suit then I encourage them to appoint someone else as a possible replacement.

 

It is absolutely essential that you fully trust the people you are appointing. They will be in control of aspects of your life when you are no longer able to exercise control. If you are in any doubt about anyone do not appoint them.

 

Although I am willing to have intended attorneys present for some of the interview that will only be if the person making the LPA, who is my client, wants them to be. If I sense any uncertainty with my client or I learn of any pressure I will advise against the LPA being made.

 

Some enquiries come from relatives who want to be able to stop a family member (usually an older one) from doing something of which they disapprove. Often that behaviour is spending the money they hoped to inherit. Such enquiries may be well meant but LPAs don’t work like that. The maker of the LPA can continue doing whatever they like unless or until they lose mental capacity. Until then all the LPAs in the world cannot interfere.

 

I hope that there has been something worth reading on this page and that I may be able to help you.

 

To contact Roger please call our Moseley office on

0121 449 5050 or email enquiries@hhb-mo.co.uk