The 1975 Act: The status of adult claims and the treatment of conditional success fees

Adult claims under the 1975 Act often require more than need and a relevant relationship. Cameron Stocks explains Financial need plus relevant relationship will not always be enough. It will often be the case that there will need to be ‘something more’ to justify an award being made. The decision in Batstone v Batstone [2022] …
This post is only available to members.

Hirachand v Hirachand & anr [2021] WTLR 185

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2022 #186

The deceased left the entirety of his modest estate to the appellant, his wife of many years. At the time of the proceedings, the appellant was a frail woman in her 80s who was profoundly deaf and living in a care home. The respondent, the estranged adult daughter of the deceased, brought a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The appellant originally failed to file an acknowledgment of service and evidence in accordance with CPR 8.4-8.6. She obtained relief from sanctions by consent but failed to meet the new deadline. No further ...

Claims by adult child beneficiaries: Is there any hope after Miles v Shearer?

Amanda Noyce reviews the latest cases under the 1975 Act and summarises the lessons on funding such claims With regard to adult able-bodied children, there is a need to ‘prove something more’ than just the qualifying relationship. ‘Where there’s a will, there’s a way’ is a great self-motivational message – until there’s an inheritance involved. …
This post is only available to members.

Rochford v Rochford [2021] WTLR 951

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2021 #184

The claimant was the daughter of the deceased and the defendant was the sister of the deceased. The deceased had made a will dated 13 September 2017. By that will the deceased had left £25,000 each to the claimant, the claimant’s son and another sister of the deceased. The remainder was left to the defendant.

The net estate was valued at around £245,000. The defendant stood to receive approximately £193,000 less legal fees.

In 1968 the deceased had separated from the claimant’s mother. Thereafter the claimant had a difficult relationship with the deceased. Prior to the birt...

The 1975 Act: After Ilott

Tara McInnes reports on a recent decision in the county court that indicates an understanding approach towards an eligible claimant with little provision and financial need The judge was keen to point out that we still have a system of testamentary freedom. To enable the courts to interfere with such freedom, it needs to be …
This post is only available to members.

J & anr v S & ors [2021] WTLR 569

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2021 #183

The claimants, being the children of the deceased, brought a claim for provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The deceased, their father, had been diagnosed with an incurable lung disease in 2004. The claimants’ parents had divorced in 2012. Their mother remarried shortly thereafter and relocated with the claimants to Scotland. The father had maintained weekly telephone contact with the claimants for a short period, but had paid no maintenance or child support, with the mother and her new husband paying for the claimants’ priv...

Wooldridge v Wooldridge & ors [2021] WTLR 755

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2021 #183

The claimant was the 50-year-old widow of the deceased. She brought a claim for reasonable financial provision to be made for her from the estate of her late husband, Ian Wooldridge.

The first, second and third defendants were the executors of the estate and adopted a neutral stance. The fourth defendant was the deceased’s 28-year-old son from a previous marriage, and the fifth defendant was the deceased’s 12-year-old son.

There was some dispute over the value of the estate and the claimant’s entitlement under the deceased’s homemade last will, but a...

The 1975 Act: Establishing genuine financial need

Recent claims from adults under the 1975 Act abound. Laura Abbott differentiates the winners from the losers While the claimant in this case was the deceased’s granddaughter, and so claiming under s1(1)(e) as a person maintained as opposed to a child under s1(1)(c), the judge’s approach to the case and rationale mirrors that in recent …
This post is only available to members.

Re Noble [2020] WTLR 1371

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2020 #181

John Robinson Noble (Mr Noble) died in 2014. The plaintiff was his youngest daughter, and the first and second defendants were respectively his eldest daughter and his son. Mr Noble left a will, of which the first defendant was the sole executrix. The will provided that Mr Noble’s estate should be held in trust for such of his children as survived him by 14 days and if more than one then in equal shares. His will expressed the wish that either of his daughters be permitted to live in his dwelling house (the family home) for so long as they require, but making clear that this expression w...

Cowan v Foreman & ors [2019] WTLR 441

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2019 #175

The claimant applied for an order under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the 1975 Act), s2, against the estate of her deceased husband (the deceased). Probate of the deceased’s will was granted on 16 December 2016 and the application was made on 8 November 2018. Under s4 of the 1975 Act, except with the permission of the court any application for an order under s2 was to be made within six months of the date of the grant. This was an application for permission to make the substantive application out of t...