In our increasingly globalized world, it’s becoming more common for individuals to own assets across multiple countries. This international dimension adds significant complexity to inheritance matters when someone passes away. The landmark case of Rehman v Hamid [2019] EWHC 3692 (Ch) provides a fascinating window into how courts navigate these cross-border succession disputes.

This case highlights the intricate web of legal considerations that arise when an estate spans different jurisdictions with competing legal frameworks. For legal practitioners, estate planners, and individuals with international assets, understanding these dynamics is crucial for effective estate planning and dispute resolution.

Understanding Forum Non Conveniens

At the heart of Rehman v Hamid lies the principle of forum non conveniens – a legal doctrine that allows courts to decline jurisdiction when another forum is deemed more appropriate for the case. This principle, firmly established in English law through Spiliada Maritime Corp v Cansulex Ltd [1987], plays a crucial role in determining where international inheritance disputes should be heard.

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5f39756b2c94e0692f78a70f

The doctrine considers various factors, including:

• The location of relevant evidence and witnesses
• The connection between the dispute and the competing jurisdictions
• The applicable law to the substantive issues
• Practical considerations like language barriers and travel costs
• The likelihood of recognition and enforcement of any judgment

Forum non conveniens recognizes that just because a court can hear a case doesn’t mean it should. This principle aims to ensure that disputes are resolved in the most appropriate and efficient jurisdiction, avoiding unnecessary complications and potentially conflicting judgments.

Key Facts of Rehman v Hamid

The case centered around Mrs. Ali, who had executed two separate wills: one in England in 1993 and another in Pakistan in 2017. Upon her death, these competing wills created significant conflict among her beneficiaries, who were spread across both countries.

The key elements of the dispute included:

• Mrs. Ali was domiciled in England, where she maintained her home
• The 1993 English will favored her UK-based relatives
• The 2017 Pakistani will benefited her Pakistani relatives
• Substantial assets existed in both jurisdictions
• Legal proceedings had already commenced in Pakistan

The English High Court had to determine whether to proceed with the case or stay the proceedings in favor of the Pakistani courts. This decision involved balancing competing jurisdictional claims and considering which forum could most effectively administer justice.

Jurisdictional Considerations in International Inheritance

When determining jurisdiction in international inheritance cases, courts typically consider several connecting factors:

• Domicile and habitual residence: The deceased’s legal home and where they primarily lived
• Location of assets: Where the property and other assets in the estate are situated
• Nationality: The citizenship of the deceased
• Place of death: Where the person passed away
• Location of will execution: Where any testamentary documents were created

In Rehman v Hamid, although Mrs. Ali was domiciled in England (traditionally a strong connecting factor for English courts), Master Julia Clark ultimately decided to stay the English proceedings. This decision recognized that Pakistan had already seized jurisdiction and had significant connections to the case, including the location of key witnesses and executors.

The ruling demonstrates that English courts take a pragmatic approach to international inheritance disputes, focusing on where justice can be most effectively served rather than rigidly asserting jurisdiction based on domicile alone.

Comparative Analysis: English and Vietnamese Approaches

The approach taken in Rehman v Hamid reflects England’s common law system. However, civil law jurisdictions like Vietnam handle international inheritance disputes quite differently.

Under Vietnamese law:

• Immovable property (real estate) is governed by the lex situs principle – the law of the country where the property is located (Article 680f Civil Code 2015)
• Movable assets are subject to the law of the deceased’s nationality.
• Vietnamese courts assert jurisdiction primarily based on asset location
• Compulsory heirship provisions ensure statutory shares for close relatives regardless of testamentary wishes (Articles 644 Civil Code 2015)
• The concept of forum non conveniens is largely absent

These differences highlight how the same international estate might be treated quite differently depending on which legal system has jurisdiction. For instance, while English law generally respects testamentary freedom, Vietnamese law would enforce mandatory shares for certain relatives regardless of what a will states.

Professional Legal Advice for Estate Planning

With the complexity of international inheritance law as seen in the Rehman v Hamid case, you should consult with legal experts from Harley Miller Law Firm – specialists in cross-border estate planning:

• Comprehensive advisory services: Harley Miller Law Firm’s attorneys can help draft international wills or coordinated wills that ensure validity across multiple countries
• Legal jurisdiction consultation: The expert team will guide you on establishing clear provisions about which jurisdiction should handle estate administration
• In-depth knowledge of inheritance law: Harley Miller Law Firm understands mandatory inheritance rules in many countries, helping protect your wishes
• Legal domicile advice: Support in establishing and clearly documenting domicile to minimize potential disputes
• Periodic update services: The legal team will help review your estate plan when there are changes in personal circumstances or legislation

With professional support from Harley Miller Law Firm, you can avoid complex jurisdictional disputes like those in the Rehman v Hamid case, saving time, costs, and protecting the interests of beneficiaries.

Conclusion

Rehman v Hamid serves as a powerful reminder of the complexities inherent in international inheritance cases. It demonstrates that jurisdictional questions are not merely technical legal matters but can fundamentally impact how an estate is distributed and which beneficiaries ultimately benefit.

As global mobility increases and cross-border asset ownership becomes more common, the lessons from this case grow increasingly relevant. For individuals with international connections, proactive estate planning with awareness of jurisdictional issues is essential. For legal practitioners, a sophisticated understanding of private international law principles and their practical application in inheritance disputes is becoming an indispensable skill.

By carefully considering jurisdictional factors and planning accordingly, individuals can help ensure their final wishes are respected across borders, while minimizing the potential for costly and emotionally draining international litigation among their loved ones. https://luatminhnguyen.com/en/introduce/services/wills-estates-2/

Viet Nam Legal and Investment Insights: https://open.spotify.com/episode/3x67NUlN3U7bk93U8oN0Ex?si=0jUn8xq4QfiaMj78s5Ieng

Contact us today:

HARLEY MILLER LAW FIRM

Address: Room A1, 14th Floor, HM Town Building, 412 Nguyen Thi Minh Khai Street, Ward 05, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Phone: +84 9372 15585

Email: [email protected]