DOWNES ESTATE

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 46, 23 February 1934, Page 11

DOWNES ESTATE

ASSESSED AT £128,906 EXECUTORS OBJECT s A. dispute between George Alfred Bowses and George Stacey Downes, executors of the estate of the late Mrs. Sarah Downes, valued at £128,900 3s Id, and the- Commissioner of Taxes, as to tho amount of death duty payable on tho : estate, camo. before the Chief Justice (Sir Michael.. Myers) at the Supreme Court today. Death duties amounting to £13,502 Is 7d have already been paid, but the Commissioner of Stamp Duties demands an additional jE20,215. .The executors of the estate arc objecting to tho assessment on the ground that the late Mrs. Downes ceased to have any interest in the property (including the Pier Hotel), on which the additional duty is demanded, more thart ten years prior to her death. The objection, said Mr. C. A. L. Treadwell, who appeared for the executors, was made known to the Commissioner of Stamp Duties, who was thereupon required by law to state a- case, but he did not do so for . over three months. Mr. Treadwell asked the Court to dismiss the case stated by the Commissioner, ■on the ground that on receipt of notice of objection he did not "thereupon" state a case. It was contended by counsel that the time taken to state a case was excessive, and that the executors were entitled to have it dismissed. The future form of the case, he said, depended on the question as to whether the case stated by the Commissioner was dismissed or not. A second application was made by Mr. Treadwell that the executors should be allowed to call evidenco to snow that although the deed which extinguished the late Mrs. Downes's interest in the property in dispute was not signed more than ten years prior to her death, there was an agreement before that time to terminate her lifo interest in tho property. • . . ' The Chief Justice intimated to Mr. A. Fair, K.C., who represented the Commissioner of Taxes, that he did;riot desire to hear him on the question as to whether on receipt of tho objection the Commissioner had "thereupon" stated a case. -Eeferring to Mr. Treadwell's second contention that the executors should be allowed to call evidence, Mr. Fair said that according to section 53 of the Death Duties Act the interest in the property did not wholly cease to exist or bo invested in tho deceased until the signing of tho.deed. „ -. ■• ... His Honour, said .that he definitely decided against the appellants on. tho first point. The .point to his mind was absolutely untenable. Ho would refer to that later in a more formal way As to tho second point, he thought that the matter as to whether tho' case should bo sent back for amendment really involved the question as to whether the evidence was admissible and should bo admitted. His Honour thought that the best thing to do was to give Mr. Trcadwell an opportunity of satisfying the Solicitor-General, if ho could; and if he could not satisfy him, then he would have to file a much fuller affidavit than' the one then before ™° Court, and see if he could satisfy