Rea v Rea & ors [2024] WTLR 701
Summer 2024 #195Anna Rea had made wills dated 29 May 1986 (the 1986 will) and 7 December 2015 (the 2015 will).
At first instance, Anna’s daughter (the appellant) claimed to propound the 2015 will in solemn form. Her brothers (the respondents) counterclaimed to set aside the 2015 will, alleging lack of testamentary capacity, want of knowledge and approval, undue influence, and fraudulent calumny. They sought to propound the 1986 will.
The claim had previously been tried and then appealed, ultimately to the Court of Appeal, where a retrial was ordered.
On the retrial, HHJ Hodge KC fou...
Sangha v Sangha & ors [2023] WTLR 1561
Winter 2023 #193Mr Hartar Singh Sangha made a will in 2007 dealing with both his English assets and his Indian assets. The 2007 will was executed as follows: Mr Sangha signed the will in the presence of one witness; that witness then signed the will; the second witness then entered, Mr Sangha acknowledged his signature in the presence of both witnesses and the second witness signed the will. In 2016, Mr Sangha made a further will in India dealing with his Indian assets. The 2016 will was declared to be Mr Sangha’s last will and contained a revocation clause revoking ‘all such previous documents’.
Da Silva v Heselton & ors [2022] WTLR 1229
Winter 2022 #189The will of the late Gladys Townsend contained at clause 11 a charging clause, the relevant part of which was couched in the following words:
‘MY TRUSTEES shall have the following powers in addition to their powers under the general law or under any other provisions of this Will or any Codicil hereto… (g) for any of my Trustees who shall be engaged in any profession or business [to] charge and be paid (in priority to all other dispositions herein) all usual professional and other fees and to retain any brokerage or commission for work or business introduced transacted ...
Guest & anr v Guest WTLR(w) 2021-05
Web OnlyThe respondent (who had been the claimant at first instance) was the eldest son of the two appellants. He had worked on the family farm full-time for some 33 years, until his relationship with his parents deteriorated. The respondent then brought proceedings against the appellants seeking a declaration of his entitlement to a beneficial interest in the farm on the basis of an alleged proprietary estoppel. At first instance, the court found in his favour, concluding that the first appellant had consistently and over time led the respondent to believe that he would inherit a sufficient sta...