header-logo header-logo

10 December 2020 / Daniel Maine
Issue: 7914 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate , Profession
printer mail-detail

Avoiding an intermeddling muddle

34273
Revised guidelines give greater clarity on when intermeddling will be prosecuted, as Daniel Maine reports
  • The intermeddling offence: imposing criminal liability.

Unlike a number of other jurisdictions, in Jersey it is a criminal offence to take possession of or in any way administer the movable estate of a deceased person prior to a grant of probate being obtained (the intermeddling offence). Her Majesty’s Attorney General (HMAG) is responsible for deciding whether to commence criminal proceedings in Jersey, including for the intermeddling offence.

The need to comply with Jersey’s probate requirements was underscored by the recent convictions of two financial services firms for intermeddling. Against that background, it is welcome that, with effect from April 2020, HMAG has issued revised guidelines on the intermeddling offence (the guidelines) that:

  • clarify when the Registrar of Probate (Registrar) must refer a case of suspected intermeddling to HMAG; and
  • provide financial services businesses with guidance on the public interest factors that HMAG will apply when deciding whether to prosecute.

The guidelines do not suggest

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll