The Taxation (Companies – Economic Substance) (Jersey) Law 2019 came into effect in January 2019 and applies to certain Jersey tax-resident companies which conduct one or more relevant activities. Family office structures which include Jersey tax-resident companies must consider whether those companies fall within the scope of the law. If they do, they must satisfy the three-stage test set out in the law or face a number of progressively punitive penalties.
Wealth is increasing exponentially among some of the world's richest families to the extent that, for many of these families, it makes commercial sense to set up their own bespoke family office to look after their key operations – and they are increasingly looking to Jersey as the place to do it. There are a range of factors as to why Jersey is becoming a jurisdiction of choice for families across the world looking to set up such an operation, including global economic shifts and Jersey's expertise and personnel.
The Jersey Court of Appeal recently handed down a long-awaited judgment in the Z Trusts case. The decision considers important questions regarding the equitable rights of former trustees and whether those rights have priority over the rights of other claimants to the assets of a trust (including successor trustees) whose liabilities exceed its assets. As such, trustees must consider the practical implications of this judgment and whether and how they should be mitigated.
The Jersey Royal Court recently ruled on the extent of its powers to restrict a party that withdraws proceedings to start afresh in a judgment that considered, for the first time, the implications of a 2014 English Court of Appeal decision on the public interest in there being finality in litigation. This is an important decision for maintaining the public interest in the finality of litigation and the efficient administration of justice.
The first-ever challenge to a decision of Channel Islands Financial Ombudsman Douglas Melville has been heard by the Jersey Royal Court. The court upheld the ombudsman's decision that local mortgage broker and lender Future Finance pay two individuals more than £63,000 in compensation.