Wealthy Businessman's Prolific Will Writing Triggers Inheritance Dispute

19th December 2022 By

Prolific will writing is very often symptomatic of a complicated life. That was certainly so in the case of a wealthy businessman who wrote four wills, benefiting different members of his family, during the final 40 years of his life.

The man had a large portfolio of properties in the UK and India. At various stages of his life, he regarded himself as married to two different women. The question of whom he was in fact married to, and when, currently remained unresolved and was to be the subject of other court proceedings.

The first of his wills was executed in 1979 and the last in the year he died. The latter document dealt only with his assets in India and included the following statement that was critical to the outcome of the case: ‘This is my last and final will and all such previous documents stand cancelled.’

Following a nine-day hearing, a judge found that the statement served to revoke all his previous wills, including his penultimate will – dated 2007 – which dealt with both his UK and Indian assets. As the final will dealt exclusively with property in India, it could not be admitted to probate in the UK.

The consequence of the judge’s ruling was that he died intestate – without making a valid will – in respect of his very substantial property in this country. The principal beneficiary of the 2007 will, one of the women to whom he regarded himself as married, challenged that outcome.

In upholding her appeal, the High Court ruled that the 2007 will remained valid and coexisted with the final will. The latter document was entirely Indian in that it was drafted on the subcontinent by an Indian lawyer and dealt solely with the man’s property in India. The statement, the Court found, was effective to revoke the 2007 will only insofar as it dealt with his Indian assets. His English property, therefore, stood to be distributed in accordance with the 2007 will.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Relationship Status Put Under Spotlight in Divorce Case

26th February, 2024 By

Divorce proceedings are rarely cut and dry, especially where the passage of time adds complexity to matters. This was certainly so in a recent case that required a Family Court judge to rule on the validity of a decree nisi. The case centred on the divorce proceedings of a couple in their fifties and focused on a decree nisi that had been pronounced in 2012, following an application by the husband. Now seeking to finalise the divorce with a decree absolute, the husband asserted that the decree nisi had been properly...

Will Execution – Remote Witnessing Legislation Expires

22nd February, 2024 By

A legal amendment that was made during the COVID-19 pandemic allowing the witnessing of wills to take place via videoconferencing has officially expired. As of 31 January 2024, the Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020 is no longer active. It was introduced in response to the pandemic, as a means of facilitating the valid execution of wills via remote witnessing. The Order applied to wills made between 31 January 2020 and 31 January 2022, but was later extended to 31 January 2024. Section 9 of the Wills Act...

Psychotherapy Condition Leads to Contact Order Appeal

20th February, 2024 By

Wherever possible, the courts will do what they can to support contact between parents and children but, in some instances, that contact comes with conditions attached. The nature of such conditions was the cause of contention in recent appeal proceedings brought by the father of two young boys. The man appealed against a High Court order that allowed for contact periods with his children, which would progress from supervised to unsupervised and increase in length but were dependent upon him engaging in psychotherapy. This condition had been imposed following a...

Beware of Builders Offering Cut-Price Work – Court of Appeal Cautionary Tale

16th February, 2024 By

Every householder should understand the dire risks involved in opening their doors to those promising to carry out cut-price building work. A Court of Appeal decision provided distressing examples of almost the worst that can happen. A householder approaching retirement age was taken in by a workman who knocked on his door, offering to paint the front of his home for £1,000. He was introduced to another man – the offender – whom the workman described as his business partner. The pair proceeded, over a period of months, to carry...