Recent case law

Negus v Bahouse and Another [2007] All ER 353

The deceased hanged himself in March 2005.  He had two former wives, a son and a daughter from his first marriage, and had been cohabiting with Ms Negus at the property he owns since 1997.  Pursuant to a 1996 Will the deceased’s son was the majority beneficiary of his £2.2 million estate.

Ms Negus successfully brought a claim pursuant to the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.  It was held that reasonable financial provision for Ms Negus’s lifetime would be the transfer of the property to her, without the encumbrance of a mortgage, and the payment of £240,000.

Kostic v Chaplin and Others [2007] EWHC 2298 (Ch)

By a Will dated the 13^th July 1989 the deceased left his entire estate (in excess of £8 million) to the Conservative Party Association.  The validity of the Will was challenged by the deceased’s only son, on the grounds that the deceased lacked the relevant mental capacity to make a Will in 1989. 

It was accepted by the Conservative Party Association that the “Deceased suffered from an irrational belief that there was an international conspiracy of dark forces in which his sister, his mother and (at times) his wife were active participants and that he and the claimant were victims of that conspiracy”.

It was accepted as being good law that for a Will to be valid, a testator must show the following:-

1. Understand the nature of his actions;
2. Understand the extent of the property he is disposing;
3. Be able to comprehend and appreciate the claims to which he ought to give effect;
4. That no disorder of the mind has “poisoned” the testators affections

Held:  The deceased was unable to form a proper appreciation of his son’s claims upon the estate.  The Deceased had suffered from delusions which had “poisoned or distorted” his affections towards his family.  The 1989 Will was therefore pronounced void.

O’Brien v Seagrave and Another [2007] 3 All ER 633

The testator died in 2005.  The claimant had lived with the testator for some 12 years before his death.  The defendant, being the former wife (W) and her son (WS) produced a Will and obtained a Grant of Probate.  Beneficiaries under the Will were WS and his infant child. 

The claimant issued proceedings seeking a declaration that the Will was invalid, that the deceased had died intestate, and for revocation of the Will on the grounds that it had been forged by W or obtained by undue influence.

Under CPR 57.7 (1) the claim form and the probate action had to contain a statement of the nature of the interest of the claimant… and the estate.

Held:  A potential claimant of the 1975 Act could be an interest… in the estate within CPR 57.7.  In the instant case the claimant had a clear financial interest in the outcome of the dispute even though judgment in her favour would not, of itself, produce an immediate financial result.