Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2022 #187Mr Bracey passed away on 27 May 2018, leaving a will dated 31 July 2015. Under that will, Mr Bracey appointed the second defendant as his executrix and trustee. The grant of probate issued on 16 March 2020 to the second defendant. Mr Bracey had been predeceased by his wife, who, like Mr Bracey himself, had been unwell at the time at which Mr Bracey had executed his will. The case related to a dispute between Mr Bracey’s son (the claimant) and his daughter (the first defendant) concerning the proper construction of the will and whether it should be rectified.
The first issue was wh...
Kevin Kennedy and Justine Reid analyse a case that outlines the steps taken for interpreting a will as well as the scope of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 The issue for the court was whether a solicitor copying and pasting a clause from a precedent bank that did not reflect the testator’s intention, and …
Continue reading "Will construction: What constitutes a clerical error?"
This post is only available to members.
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2013 #130Kiritkumar Mahendersinh Mahida (testator) and his wife, the defendant, owned (inter alia) freehold property at 148-152 Leytonstone Road London as beneficial joint tenants. They were, however, separated when the testator made his last will (will) on 17 July 2002. After appointing the first and second claimants his executors and trustees, the testator gave certain property to his brother, the third claimant, and his three sons, the fourth to sixth claimants. In particular, by clause 3(c) he gave them an interest in the property at Leytonstone Road, but unfortunately expressed the ...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | April 2013 #128Mrs Joan Pittaway (the testatrix) made a will dated 15 December 2010 and died on 21 January 2011. Her will appointed Mr Kell as one of two executors.
Clause 4 of her will left pecuniary legacies to 15 named relatives and four charities (with £7500 in total left to charity). Clause 6 of the will left her residue to be paid ‘equally among such of the beneficiaries named in clause 4 as shall survive me and if more than one in equal shares’.
It was alleged that the testatrix wished her residue to be split only between family members and not the charities. The size...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | May 2012 #119Alfred Thomas Rawlings (H) and Maureen Catherine Rawlings (W) were husband and wife who, on 17 May 1999, signed mirror wills leaving their entire estate to each other or, if the other failed to survive, to the appellant who was treated as their son. The respondents, who were their natural sons, were excluded but stood to benefit on intestacy if the wills were invalid. In the event, by mistake H signed W’s will and W signed H’s will but the error was not noticed then, or on the death of W. It was only noticed after the death of H in August 2006 when a dispute arose as to whether the estat...
