Analysis
By her will dated 10 November 2009 the deceased was expressed to give ‘all my personal property of whatsoever and wheresoever situated to my trustees on the following trusts:
3.1 To pay my just debts, funeral and testamentary expenses.
3.2 For Patrick absolutely.
3.3 Provided that if Patrick should not survive me, then my Trustees shall hold my residuary estate as follows:
4.1 as to one tenth to Douglas Victor Harris
4.2 as to one part to Michael Harris
4.3 as to one part to Pamela Ellen How
4.4 as to one part to Sybil Maisie Wickens
4.5 as to one part to Margaret Young and Paul Young
4.6 as to one tenth to Newbury Hospital of [address]
4.7 As to one tenth for MacMillan Cancer Fund
4.8 as to one tenth to Guide Dogs for the Blind
4.9 as to one tenth for Guide Dogs for the Deaf
4.10 as to one tenth for West Berkshire Ambulance Hospital.’
The deceased died on 26 October 2013, having been predeceased by her husband, Patrick. She was also predeceased by the first named beneficiary, Douglas Victor Harris. As there was no gift over, this resulted in a partial intestacy. The executors, who were named as the partners in the firm of Charles Hoile Solicitors, sought the true construction; alternatively, rectification of the will. The principal issues were whether the deceased’s residuary estate should be treated as comprising all of her personal and real property after the payment of her debts, funeral and testamentary expenses; whether one part of the residuary estate was equal to one tenth and whether the charitable beneficiaries as described in the will could be identified by reference to their addresses or registered charity numbers.
Held (granting the relief sought):
It was inherently unlikely that the deceased would have given instructions to dispose of her estate excepting the family home. The term ‘residuary estate’, though not defined, should be regarded as comprising the whole of the deceased’s estate after the payment of her just debts, funeral and testamentary expenses. The residuary estate was expressly given in tenths and in parts and, having regard to the fact that there was a total of ten gifts made by consecutively numbered sub-clauses, the term ‘one part’ should be construed as meaning ‘one tenth part’. Newbury Hospital was a colloquial description in the locality of, and should be construed as, the institution to be found at the address given; namely West Berkshire Community Hospital. The charitable beneficiaries described respectively as MacMillan Cancer Fund, Guide Dogs for the Blind and Guide Dogs for the Deaf could be identified by reference to their registered charity numbers as MacMillan Cancer Support, Guide Dogs for the Blind Association and Hearing Dogs for Deaf People. West Berkshire Ambulance Hospital could not be identified by reference to either an address or a registered charity number. It was a nonsensical description that was not susceptible of construction but, by reference to surviving extraneous evidence of the deceased’s instructions, was capable of rectification, either on the ground of clerical error or on the ground of a failure on the part of the draftsman to understand the instructions given, by reference to the Thames Valley and Chiltern Air Ambulance Trust.
[1] This is my extemporary judgment in litigation concerning the estate of the late Florence Rosemary Harte, deceased (Claim Number HC 2014 001912). The late Mrs Harte died on 26 October 2013 having made a will dated 10 November 2009. She was pre-deceased by her husband, Mr Patrick Joseph Harte. He had made a will …Continue reading "Re Harte [2015] EWHC 2351"