Georgia Bedworth

Georgia is recognised by Chambers UK Bar Guide 2016 as a leading junior in Court of Protection (Property and Affairs) work.  She is experienced in a range of Court of Protection mattes, including statutory will applications, applications for the approval of gifts, applications for the removal of attorneys and deputies.

Chambers UK Bar Guide 2016 comments that Georgia “has that ability that works very well in the Court of Protection to take a non-aggressive stance but nonetheless fight her client’s corner.” and also that “She is very diligent, very well prepared and does an effective job.” Previous editions of Chambers UK report that “She has encyclopaedic knowledge of the Court of Protection jurisdiction and clearly and simply condenses a myriad of turgid facts into a cohesive, clear, comprehensive account of events”.

Reported Cases:

• Re JDS [2012] EWHC 302 (COP), [2012] WTLR 475: Instructed by the Deputy in the leading case on the issue of how the best-interests test under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 should be applied in the context of an application for authority to make a gift for the purpose of mitigating future inheritance tax out of a personal-injury damages award.
• Acting for the applicant on an application for a statutory will where there was an order for P to attend the final hearing and it was necessary to join the Attorney General.
• Acting for the Attorney on an application to authorise a substantial lifetime gift of shares to a charity which was not a beneficiary under P’s will.
• Acting for the applicant on a successful Application to remove an attorney under an LPA who had been appointed two months after meeting P.
• Acting for an attorney under an EPA in a complex family dispute which raised issues as to whether it was in P’s best interests for her home to be sold and a new home purchased near to her daughter as well as a claim to remove the attorney.

Georgia’s strong traditional practice includes probate disputes, litigation concerning the administration of estates, including applications for the removal of personal representatives and trustees and claims under the 1975 Act. Georgia is also instructed in litigation concerning high-value trusts and was recently involve in an application to remove a protector of an offshore trust worth £500 million.  As a result of her expertise in capital taxes, Georgia has been involved in disputes between tax payers and HMRC and represented (with Simon Taube QC) the successful tax payer in Buzzoni v HMRC, a case concerning the inheritance tax gift with reservation rules. Georgia frequently advises in relation to contentious construction matters and in relation to claims brought by and against trustees, including applications for Beddoe relief.  Indeed, Chambers UK 2015 reported that Georgia is “looked to by private clients for trusts and probate work, notably in connection with real property. She has a further focus in related capital tax matters and contentious construction issues.”

Georgia recognises the need for a practical approach and the need to present matters to clients in a straightforward and understandable way. The traditional chancery section of the 2015 edition of the Legal 500 described Georgia as “an unalloyed pleasure to work with, understanding the needs of lay clients and solicitors”. Recognised in Chambers 2016 for her technical expertise, approachability and ability “to present complicated issues in a straightforward manner which is easy for clients to understand”, previous editions of Chambers Bar Guide report that she “excels in all areas of traditional chancery work” and that “she is fantastic at drilling down into the detail of a case. Her advice is always highly detailed and pragmatic, and once in court she proves highly dogged.”

Reported Cases:

• Buzzoni v HMRC [2013] EWCA Civ 1684; [2014] 1 WLR 3040: Represented the tax payer in a claim concerning whether a reversionary lease scheme entered into by the deceased was effective to avoid the reservation of benefit rules.  The Court of Appeal ruled, in the taxpayer’s favour, that there had been no reservation of benefit (led by Simon Taube QC).
• Ingrey v King [2014]: Claim by an executor for directions as to what, if any, reservation he should make prior to distributing the estate where the Deceased had entered into a film partnership scheme in an attempt to mitigate income tax liabilities, leading to significant contingent liabilities which were potentially preventing the finalising of the administration of the estate.
• Acted for the trustees of a trust worth £500 million in a claim by the beneficiaries to set aside an appointment made by the trustees which created the office of a protector as a fraud on a power and for the removal of the protector (led by Simon Taube QC).
• Acted for the executors of an £80 million estate defending a 1975 Act claim brought by a lady who claimed to be the Deceased’s cohabitee.
• Successfully represented the beneficiaries in a claim for the recognition of a trust declared by a matrimonial court in Oregon over a property in England.

Georgia frequently advises on the administration of trust and estates, issues of construction and related capital taxes issues as well as capital taxes planning.  Admired for her ability to “present complicated issues in a straightforward manner which is easy for clients to understand”, Chambers High Net Worth Guide also describes her as “extremely knowledgeable” and “both technically good and practical in her approach”. Georgia has particular expertise in applications under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958 and has been instructed in numerous variations of high value settlements, including those with a foreign element.

Reported Cases:

• Ingrey v King [2016] WTLR 131: Claim by an executor for directions as to what, if any, reservation he should make prior to distributing the estate where the Deceased had entered into a film partnership scheme in an attempt to mitigate income tax liabilities, leading to significant contingent liabilities which were potentially preventing the finalising of the administration of the estate.
• C v C [2016] WTLR 223: Application to extend the perpetuity period and accumulation period of a number of trusts, some of which were governed by Kenyan law. The court dealt with the scope of the Court’s jurisdiction under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958 in relation to foreign trusts.
• Re Portman Estate [2015] WTLR 871: Application by trustees (without joining any defendants) under s. 57 Trustee Act 1925 to confer numerous additional administrative powers on the trustees in relation to trusts worth, on aggregate, approximately £1 billion.
• Allfrey v Allfrey [2015] WTLR 1117: Application under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958 to extend the perpetuity period and accumulation period of a substantial trust

Georgia frequently advises on capital taxes issues arising in the administration of trusts and estates.　 Georgia also undertakes and advises on capital taxes planning. Admired for her ability to “present complicated issues in a straightforward manner which is easy for clients to understand”, which is important in the taxation field. Chambers High Net Worth Guide also describes her as “extremely knowledgeable” and “both technically good and practical in her approach”. As a result of her expertise in capital taxes, Georgia has been involved in disputes between tax payers and HMRC and represented (with Simon Taube QC) the successful tax payer in Buzzoni v HMRC, a case concerning the in-heritance tax gift with reservation rules. Chambers UK 2015 reported that Georgia is “looked to by private clients for trusts and probate work, notably in connection with real property. She has a further focus in related capital taxes matters and contentious construction issues.”

Georgia advises in relation to the construction of charitable gifts in wills, in particular dealing with the problems which arise when a charity has ceased to exist since the date of the will or where the charity named has never existed. In addition, Georgia has experience in non-contentious drafting with a charitable element

Described in the Property Litigation section of the Legal 500 as “calm, collected and good on her feet when dealing with technical issues”, Georgia is frequently instructed for her technical expertise in real property and landlord and tenant matters. Georgia has significant experience in dealing with the full range of commercial and residential landlord and tenant issues. In addition, Georgia’s practice includes advising on and litigation in relation to real property matters such as easements, restrictive covenants, land registration and cohabitation disputes. The Legal 500 2014 noted that she is “a particularly good barrister with strong experience in landlord and tenant” who is “extremely bright and tenacious”.  Georgia deploys her real property expertise to good effect in her trusts and probate work.

As well as pure property matters, Georgia’s work frequently combines property and trusts or probate issues, and cohabitation disputes in particular require such dual expertise. Whilst recognising the importance of being able to deal with the technicalities of the law, Georgia also recognises the need to be able to explain matters clearly to clients. Legal 500 2015 reports that within the Property practice area “she has a very keen legal intellect and an enviable ability to demystify very complex legal issues”.