Will construction: Context is key

Interpreting wills is not a question of dictionary definitions. Elis Gomer examines a case that underscores this principle It is unhelpful to stick too dogmatically to the ‘dictionary’ meaning of a word or term when there is a likelihood that it is being used – for whatever reason – in an unconventional way. The recent …
This post is only available to members.

Jump & anr v Lister & anr [2016] EWHC 2160 (Ch)

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

John Raymond Winson and Mable Winson (Mr & Mrs Winson) made ‘mirror image’ wills with the first defendant, a solicitor employed by the second defendant, on 17 August 2010 by which, in simple terms (and subject to two minor specific legacies by Mrs Winson), they left their estate to each other but, if that gift failed, left pecuniary legacies to the same named individuals and charities with the net residue passing to the claimants in equal shares. In each will there was a survivorship clause in the following terms:

‘My estate is to be divided as if any person ...

Reading & anr v Reading & ors [2015] EWHC 946 (CH)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | September 2015 #152

John Reading died on 6 July 2005. He left a will dated 30 January 2004. He was survived by his wife, Janet; his two children, Stuart and Sally; and his three stepchildren, Neil, Ruth and Robin Sedgwick.

Under the will, Mrs Reading and Richard Flack were appointed trustees of a nil-rate band discretionary trust. The clauses of the will setting out the trusts of the nil-rate band trust included the testator’s ‘issue’ in the beneficial class. There was provision for such issue to be born at the testator’s death or thereafter during the trust period. Mrs Reading and Mr Flack brought a...