Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2023 #193The dispute concerned which will of the deceased, Anna Rea, should be admitted to probate. Her first will dated 29 May 1986 gave all of her property to such of her four children as should survive her, if more than one in equal shares absolutely, subject to them surviving her by 28 days (the 1986 will).
A more recent will dated 7 December 2015 (the 2015 will) was witnessed by the solicitor who prepared it and the deceased’s GP. It provided for the deceased’s house to be left to the claimant, on account of the care she had given the deceased, with the residue to be divided between h...
Ken To and Catherine Hau explore the success of challenges to wills based on fraudulent calumny in recent English jurisprudence It was not necessary for the party seeking to establish fraudulent calumny to prove that it was the only cause of the change in the testator’s intentions as to his or her testamentary dispositions. It …
Continue reading "Fraudulent calumny: Setting aside wills obtained by lies"
This post is only available to members.
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2022 #188The deceased executed his will on 15 November 2016 and died on 7 December 2016 from leukaemia. Pursuant to the will, a bequest of cars and other chattels was made to the claimant (the deceased’s son), while the defendants (the deceased’s daughter and her partner) were made executors and beneficiaries of the residuary estate. The will justified the provision to the claimant on the basis that he had become estranged from the deceased.
The claimant challenged the will on the basis of fraudulent calumny, undue influence and want of knowledge and approval. In particular, the claimant c...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2022 #187The claimant, who was the only child of Cynthia Morris (the testatrix), was the principal beneficiary under her will dated 25 October 2000 but not under later wills made on 28 November 2006 and 14 July 2010 (the wills). The testatrix died on 7 August 2017. Under the terms of her last will, the second and third defendants were appointed as executors; pecuniary legacies were bequeathed to the claimant (£35,000), the first defendant (£70,000) and the fourth defendant (£10,000); and her residuary estate was gifted to the sixth to ninth defendants who were charities. The claimant first intima...
Amanda Noyce examines where we are now after Whittle v Whittle In both Christodoulides and Whittle the testator was frail, elderly and close to death and the calumniator was living in their parent’s house and had isolated the parent. How often does the heart of a contentious probate lawyer sink when a new enquiry is …
Continue reading "Fraudulent calumny and undue influence: When foul play is suspected"
This post is only available to members.
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2020 #180The claimant and the defendant were sisters, the daughters of Agni Iacovou (the testatrix). By her will dated 7 August 2012 (the will), made shortly before her death two days later, the testatrix gave her entire net residuary estate to the claimant whom she appointed to be her executrix. The claimant issued proceedings on 18 June 2014 seeking an order that the court pronounce for the will in solemn form. The defendant defended the claim on the basis that the will had been procured by fraudulent calumny – that the claimant had poisoned the mind of the testatrix by casting untruthful asper...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2019 #177The claimant (Rita) was the daughter of Anna Rea (T) who died on 26 July 2016. The defendants (Remo, Nino, and David) were T’s other children. Rita propounded a will dated 7 December 2015 (the 2015 Will). The defendants defended on the basis that T had lacked testamentary capacity to execute the 2015 Will, that she did not know and approve of its contents, and that her execution of it was procured by undue influence and fraudulent calumny. They counterclaimed for probate propounding an earlier will dated 29 May 1986 (the 1986 Will). At trial they had abandoned the challenge based on lack...
