Separate settlements: changes of Revenue view
The Revenue’s view of what transactions give rise to a new settlement has changed over theyears. For instance it was at one time considered that the exercise of a power ofappointment (as opposed to a power of advancement) under a trust deed, other than ageneral power (that is to say one to appoint trust property to anyone the personexercising the power may choose), could never give rise to a new settlement. This wasshown to be wrong by Hart v Briscoe, 52TC53. It was also at one time considered possiblefor property to pass to a separate settlement without there being a charge under Section71(1). This was shown to be wrong by Lord Wilberforce in Roome v Edwards, 54TC359 at 390H.A Statement of Practice, SP9/81, was issued after Roome v Edwards, but this was replacedby SP7/84, see CG37840.