Donald Sutherland, a towering figure in the world of cinema, passed away on June 20, 2024, leaving behind a rich legacy of unforgettable performances that spanned over six decades. Sutherland’s career was marked by his remarkable ability to embody a wide range of characters, bringing depth, nuance, and authenticity to every role he undertook. His contribution to the film industry is immense, and his presence on screen will be deeply missed by fans and colleagues alike.

Born on July 17, 1935, in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada, Donald McNichol Sutherland showed an early interest in the performing arts. He pursued his passion for acting at the London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art, laying the foundation for what would become an illustrious career. His breakthrough came in the 1960s with roles in films like “The Dirty Dozen” (1967), where he played the quirky and memorable character Vernon Pinkley. This performance catapulted him into the spotlight and established him as a versatile actor capable of tackling diverse roles.

One of Sutherland’s most iconic performances was in the 1976 war film “The Eagle Has Landed.” In this thrilling tale of a Nazi plot to kidnap Winston Churchill, Sutherland portrayed the enigmatic and daring Liam Devlin, an IRA operative working with the German forces. His portrayal of Devlin was marked by a perfect blend of charm and cunning, making the character both compelling and memorable. This role showcased Sutherland’s ability to capture the essence of complex characters, adding layers of intrigue and humanity to his performance.

Sutherland’s career was punctuated by a series of critically acclaimed roles in a variety of genres. In the 1970s, he delivered powerful performances in films like “M*A*S*H” (1970), where he played the irreverent surgeon Hawkeye Pierce, and “Klute” (1971), in which he starred opposite Jane Fonda as a detective entangled in a web of mystery and intrigue. His role in “Don’t Look Now” (1973), a psychological horror film directed by Nicolas Roeg, further cemented his reputation as a masterful actor capable of handling intense, emotionally charged material.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Sutherland continued to take on challenging roles that showcased his range and versatility. In “Ordinary People” (1980), he played the compassionate father Calvin Jarrett, earning critical praise for his sensitive and nuanced performance. His work in “JFK” (1991) as X, a mysterious government informant, demonstrated his ability to command the screen and captivate audiences with his presence.

In addition to his film work, Sutherland also made significant contributions to television, earning accolades for his roles in series like “Commander in Chief” and “The Hunger Games” film series, where he portrayed the menacing President Snow. His voice, distinctive and commanding, brought a unique gravitas to every character he played.

Sutherland’s dedication to his craft was evident in every performance, and his influence on the film industry is immeasurable. He received numerous awards and honours throughout his career, including a Governor General’s Performing Arts Award for Lifetime Artistic Achievement, Canada’s highest honour in the performing arts.

Donald Sutherland’s passing marks the end of an era, but his legacy will live on through the countless films and performances that continue to inspire and entertain audiences around the world. He leaves behind a rich tapestry of work that serves as a testament to his talent, dedication, and enduring impact on the art of acting. His presence will be sorely missed, but his spirit will forever be a part of cinematic history.

The Daily Telegraph, a prominent national newspaper, has recently launched a campaign urging the government to abolish inheritance tax (IHT). The publication highlights that over 50 Conservative MPs also support this call, considering the tax to be morally unjustifiable for individuals’ estates after their passing.

The newspaper’s front-page story emphasizes that the number of estates subject to IHT has significantly increased since the Conservatives came into power, despite previous promises to eliminate the tax for all but the wealthiest estates. This surge in affected estates is attributed to the continuous freezing of nil-rate bands.

The article argues that IHT is fundamentally unfair as it penalizes individuals who have diligently saved money throughout their lives, having already paid taxes on their income. It particularly impacts middle-class families seeking to assist their children or grandchildren in purchasing homes.

To address these concerns, The Telegraph is campaigning for the scrapping of inheritance tax, urging the Conservative party to prioritize this in their next election manifesto. The newspaper highlights growing apprehension that if the Labour party assumes power, savings and assets will be targeted to finance increased state spending.

The publication also notes an increase in letters from its readers, expressing their dissatisfaction with intrusive probate investigations into their estates.

Former Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi joins the criticism, asserting that inheritance tax is morally wrong, as it seizes assets upon a person’s death. Furthermore, it creates financial and economic distortions with far-reaching consequences.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, echoes the sentiment, calling for the abolition of IHT and highlighting what he calls a relatively ‘modest’ contribution of £7.1 billion to the Treasury last year.

The Telegraph shares its analysis, revealing that the number of individuals paying IHT is projected to rise by 45% over the next decade, with the average bill surpassing £300,000.

In response to the campaign, a Treasury spokesperson emphasizes that over 93% of estates are expected to be exempt from IHT in the coming years. However, the tax continues to generate over £7 billion annually, supporting essential public services such as the NHS and schools.

To understand where you stand with inheritance tax and to explore strategies to mitigate its impact, speak with Ackary Benjamin, whose expert team can provide valuable insights to help you navigate the complexities of estate planning and taxation.

Karl Lagerfeld, the renowned former Creative Director at Chanel, left behind a world-famous cat named Choupette upon his passing in 2019. While the exact amount is undisclosed, reports suggest that Lagerfeld left Choupette a substantial sum of $1.5 million in his will. Now, Lagerfeld’s former housekeeper, Françoise Caçote, is responsible for caring for Choupette. But how does the law handle leaving money to an animal, and how does it practically work?

Legally, pets are considered personal property, unless they serve as working animals, in which case they are treated as business assets. Choupette, being a social media “influencer” with over 250,000 Instagram followers and substantial earnings during Lagerfeld’s lifetime, blurs the lines of what constitutes a “working animal.” However, more traditional forms of animal work are likely what authorities had in mind.

Leaving money directly to an animal, as property, is not possible. So, what are the available options? One option is to establish a trust for the pet’s benefit. Typically, trusts require human beneficiaries, but in the case of trusts for the general welfare of animals, they are valid as charitable trusts. In a trust specifically for a testator’s pet, the funds are designated to a legatee who acts as the nominated trustee responsible for caring for the pet. If the trustee refuses the responsibility, the trust fails. However, if the trustee accepts, the court issues a Pettingall order, instructing the trustee to use the funds for the pet’s welfare. If the trustee fails to fulfill their duties, those entitled to the property can seek court intervention to enforce the trust or claim the property under a resulting trust.

Another option, more straightforward but still requiring careful drafting, is to leave the pet alongside a cash legacy to a designated person. The terms should ensure that the person receives the legacy only if they agree to care for the pet. Although there is no oversight of the person’s actions, choosing someone the testator trusts is crucial. This arrangement should minimize the need for further court involvement after the testator’s death.

It’s worth noting that bequests for the benefit of pets can sometimes lead to contentious estate disputes. In the United States, billionaire hotelier Leona Helmsley famously left a significant portion of her estate for the care of dogs, including a specific trust fund of $12 million for her Maltese dog, Trouble. In England, the recent case of Reginald and Maureen McLean involved a dispute over mutual/mirror wills, where the deceased’s son claimed his mother intended for him to inherit her property to care for her parrot and Jenday.

Ensuring the welfare of pets in wills involves navigating a legal landscape that blurs the distinction between property and companionship. It is essential to carefully consider and designate a guardian for your beloved furry friend, someone who will ensure their well-being and continue to celebrate your legacy even after you’re gone.