Continue reading "Wills: Trial and error"
The British University in Dubai v Ebrahimi [2021] WTLR 703
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2021 #183The deceased died on 4 July 2018 leaving a disputed will, dated 3 May 2018, probate of which was granted to the defendant, who together with his wife were the only beneficiaries.
The 2018 will was a holographic one-page will. On one side it bore the signatures of two witnesses who, it was common ground, had witnessed the testator’s signature on 4 May 2018 when not together at the same time and so did not validly attest the will in accordance with s9, Wills Act 1837. On the reverse of the will were two further signatures dated 3 May 2018, belonging to two further wit...
B v C & ors [2021] WTLR 1
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2021 #182A was survived by C, his sister; H, with whom he had had a relationship; E and F, who were the daughters of A and H; B, with whom A had also had a relationship; and G, the son of A and B. C was one of the executors of A’s will. Each of A and C owned 50% of the shares in X Ltd (the company) and on A’s death C remained a director and was in control of the company. During A’s lifetime, a property (Property 1) was acquired in his name and remained so at his death.
There were three claims following A’s death: (1) H claimed to be the beneficial owner of Property 1 (the property claim); ...
Clarke-Sullivan v Clarke-Sullivan [2021] WTLR 109
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2021 #182The claimant and the deceased, who both originated from New Zealand, were married. They lived in London from 2006-10 and in Dubai from 2010-15, returning to London before the deceased’s death in 2019.
In 2014, the claimant and the deceased created a discretionary trust under the laws of New Zealand, with New Zealand being the initial forum of administration (the trust). The beneficiaries included the claimant and the deceased, their future issue and organisations that were deemed to be charitable under New Zealand law. The trust was established to hold property intended to be purc...
Wills: Which law to interpret a will – a simple question with a complicated answer
Re Wales [2020] WTLR 1121
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2020 #180The deceased died on 17 February 2015 as a widower with no children. He left a will dated 22 December 2008. The claimants were his executors.
Clause 7 of the will left the residuary estate to ‘such all of my nephew’s and niece’s children’. At the date of his death, the deceased had two blood nephews and two blood nieces, and also three nephews by marriage and one niece by marriage. A further nephew by marriage had died in 1992 leaving a son. The claimants sought directions as to whether the gift was just to the nieces and nephews by blood, or whether it was also to the nieces and ...
Wills: The mysterious case of the long-lost will
Continue reading "Wills: The mysterious case of the long-lost will"
Wills: Prevention rather than cure
Continue reading "Wills: Prevention rather than cure"
Wills: A welcome update?
Continue reading "Wills: A welcome update?"
Barnaby & anr v Johnson [2020] WTLR 67
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2020 #178Mrs Maudlin Bascoe (T) died on 29 August 2015. Cs sought to prove a will dated 27 April 2005 (the 2005 will) naming them as executors. C1 was T’s son. C2 was T’s former solicitor and the draftsman of her wills from 1988 2005. D was T’s daughter. T also had two other children – a son, G, (who pre-deceased her) and a daughter, B (who died after T in 2017).
Under the 2005 will, D received a legacy of £100. There was an earlier will dated 25 October 1992 (the 1992 will) leaving D a legacy of £10,000 the validity of which D did not dispute at trial.
D challenged the 2005 will, a...