fbpx

Challenge to Will's Validity Rejected by High Court

12th April 2024 By

The best way to ensure your assets will be distributed as you wish is to have your will professionally drafted by a qualified solicitor. In a recent case, a challenge to the validity of an elderly man’s will was dismissed by the High Court.

The man had previously made a will in 2011, leaving most of his estate equally to his three children. In 2018, by which time one of his sons had predeceased him, he made a further will, leaving the residue of his estate to his other son and his daughter. He passed away in 2020, at the age of 91. His two surviving children obtained a grant of probate of the 2018 will later that year.

The deceased son’s daughters challenged the validity of the 2018 will and sought an order revoking the grant of probate. They claimed that the man lacked capacity to make the will, that he did not know and approve its contents and that it was made as a result of undue influence or fraudulent calumny. They argued that, up until his death, the man had intended to divide his estate into three shares, one of which would pass to his deceased son’s children.

The Court noted that the man had suffered from a number of health conditions, including emphysema, heart disease and impaired hearing, by the time he made the 2018 will. After hearing evidence from medical experts and from the solicitors who drafted the will, however, it concluded that he had testamentary capacity. In ruling that he also knew and approved the will’s contents, the Court took into account that his two surviving children had also been the intended beneficiaries of a draft will that had been drawn up 18 months earlier, and that the attendance notes made by his solicitor indicated that he had reviewed the 2018 will and confirmed he was happy with it.

The Court also concluded that the various allegations made by the daughters did not come close to persuading it that the 2018 will was procured by undue influence or fraud. The will was therefore valid.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Company Owner's Negligible Value Claim Unsuccessful

29th April, 2024 By

When an asset falls in value to the point that it is almost worthless, it may be possible to make a negligible value claim under Section 24 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992. The asset will then be treated as if it had been sold and immediately acquired again, so that the loss can be set off against other income. For a claim to succeed, however, the asset must have become of negligible value during the time the claimant owned it. On 30 September 2017, a woman who...

Court Sanctions Leg Amputation for Man Lacking Mental Capacity

24th April, 2024 By

The courts are often called upon to sanction treatment for patients whose ability to make decisions for themselves is impaired. In a recent case on point, the Court of Protection had to decide whether it was in the best interests of a man with mental health issues to have his right leg amputated above the knee. The man, aged 60, was taken to hospital by his niece. He was found to have an ulcerated leg. He had a history of paranoid schizophrenia, and believed that the sores on his leg...

High Court Grants Parental Order Despite Previous Adoption

18th April, 2024 By

In law, adopted children are regarded as having been born to their adoptive parents. The Family Division of the High Court recently considered whether that fact precluded a parental order being granted under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (HFEA) in respect of a child born via surrogacy. A couple who lived in the USA had entered into a surrogacy arrangement with another woman. An adoption order naming the couple as the child's parents had been made by a US court and was automatically recognised under UK law. However,...

Flat Owner Not Liable for Pre-existing Structural Issues

16th April, 2024 By

When building owners carry out works on their property, are they liable for damage to adjoining properties that results from pre-existing structural issues? The Court of Appeal recently provided welcome clarification on that question. The owner of a ground-floor flat wished to extend it by building out into his garden. He served notices on owners of adjoining properties, as required by the Party Wall etc. Act 1996. The works caused the rear wall of two adjoining properties to drop by about 2 mm, which led to internal walls and floor...