Edkins v Hopkins & ors [2016] EWHC 2542 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | January/February 2017 #166

The claimant was a friend and business colleague of Philip Hopkins, and the executor and main beneficiary under Mr Hopkins’ will dated 6 June 2014. The will draftsman, a partner in a law firm, attended Mr Hopkins at his home with two members of the firm’s staff who witnessed his signature. During the execution of the will, she noticed that Mr Hopkins was unwell and later that day he was readmitted into hospital. He died ten days later on 19 August 2014, having been diagnosed with unspecified alcoholic liver damage.

The claimant brought a claim to prove the validity of the 2014 wil...

Wills: Crossing a line

Brendan Cotter considers how likely a claim against a testamentary predator is to succeed ‘The classic sign of undue influence is the main beneficiary being active in the preparation of a will in which they take a substantial benefit.’As Hilaire Belloc wrote in Dedicatory Ode 1910: ‘The question’s very much too wide, and much too …
This post is only available to members.

Elliott v Simmonds & anr [2016] EWHC 732 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | October 2016 #163

Kenneth William Jordan (Mr Jordan) died on 4 August 2012 leaving a wife (from whom he was estranged) and two adult children. The claimant was Mr Jordan’s partner during the last years of his life and the first defendant was his daughter from a relationship that predated his marriage. He had previously made a will giving pecuniary legacies to the first defendant and two of his sisters with the residuary estate passing to the claimant. Subsequently, in January 2012, Mr Jordan gave instructions to Mr Mumford (who was his brother-in-law), a solicitor with the firm Melia Mumford, to make a ne...

Testamentary Capacity: Facing the facts

McCabe v McCabe [2015] reaffirms the legal test for testamentary capacity in Banks v Goodfellow [1875]. Simrun Garcha reports ‘The court must consider all the relevant evidence and draw inferences from the material in reaching its decision as to whether the propounder of the will has proved the testator knew and approved its contents.’ The …
This post is only available to members.

King v The Chiltern Dog Rescue & anr [2015] EWCA Civ 581

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | September 2015 #152

June Margaret Fairbrother (deceased) lived at 12 Kingcroft Road, Harpenden (property) with a number of cats and dogs, of which she was very fond, as she had no children. It was common knowledge within her family that she intended to leave her estate to animal charities which she supported. By a will dated 20 March 1998 (last will) the deceased left her residuary estate to seven such charities (charities). The claimant, who was a nephew, came to live with the deceased, when she was 78 years old, in the summer of 2007. The arrangement was that he would care for his aunt in return for a hom...

Testamentary Capacity: Banking on Banks v Goodfellow

Walker v Badmin has clarified the correct test for testamentary capacity. Araba Taylor explains ‘The clarity offered by the Walker judgment is very welcome, given the conflict between earlier first instance decisions and what the judge described as the “rather ambivalent view” in the textbooks.’ It is now settled: the test for testamentary capacity in …
This post is only available to members.

Re Ashkettle [2013] EWHC 2125 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | October 2013 #133

Mrs Louisa Ashkettle (the testatrix) died on 27 September 2007, aged 86. She left two wills dated 2 October 1986 and 18 January 1999. While the 1986 will left everything equally between her two sons (the claimants) and her daughter (the respondent), the 1999 will (the will) left everything to the respondent. The claimants stated that:

  1. (i) the will was not properly executed;
  2. (ii) the testatrix lacked testamentary capacity at its execution;
  3. (iii) the testatrix did not know and approve the contents of the will; and
  4. (iv) if their assertions at (ii)...

Testamentary Capacity: Satisfying Banks v Goodfellow

Simon v Byford demonstrates that the courts will not set aside lightly a will because the testator has failing cognitive faculties. Harriet Atkinson and Zahra Kanani analyse the case ‘The case highlights that for testamentary capacity to be present, the test in Banks v Goodfellow must be satisfied.’ There has been a sharp rise in …
This post is only available to members.

Re Wilson (dec’d) [2013] EWHC 499 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2013 #130

The testatrix Iris Wilson (Iris) made a will dated 31 August 2010 and died on 6 October 2010. Her will appointed the first defendant Mr Phythian as the sole executor and left her personal effects and the residue of her estate to the second defendant Mrs Phythian and the property known as North Lodge in Yalding Kent in equal shares to Mr and Mrs Phythian.

Mrs Lynda Turner (the claimant) the niece of Iris challenged the will on three grounds:

  • Lack of proper execution.
  • Lack of mental capacity.
  • Lack of knowledge and approval of the contents of the will.<...

Wills: Code of practice needed?

The Court of Appeal decision in Burgess v Hawes has muddied the waters on capacity, and want of knowledge and approval. Martyn Frost explains why The importance of the experienced practitioner’s evidence is going to be determined by what they did and what they know of what they should be doing. The recent judgment from …
This post is only available to members.