header-logo header-logo

27 November 2024
Issue: 8096 / Categories: Legal News , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

A nod was enough to revoke the will

A dying woman successfully completed a deathbed revocation of her will after nodding at her solicitor to ask for her help in tearing up the document. 

Solicitor Haffwen Webb’s note of the meeting read: ‘Carry was able to tear around three quarters of the way through and then HW [Haffwen Webb] helped her tear up the rest of it.’

The court heard oral evidence that Webb, seeing her client struggling, asked if she would like help to finish tearing the five-page document. The client, looking directly at Webb, nodded. Webb then helped her complete the task by placing her own hands on her client’s hands.

Under s 20, Wills Act 1837, a will can be revoked by ‘the burning, tearing, or otherwise destroying the same by the testator, or by some person in his presence and by his direction…’.

Consequently, 92-year-old Carry Keats’ £800,000 estate passed by intestacy to her younger sister, Josephine Oakley, rather than five cousins who were the beneficiaries of the will. However, the cousins challenged the revocation on the basis of mental capacity and the assistance to rip up the will.

Delivering his judgment, in Crew and another v Oakley and others [2024] EWHC 2847 (Ch), Deputy Master Linwood said: ‘Behind this simple act of tearing is enmity in the wider family involving allegations of undue influence, greed and bullying, with an unseemly scrabble for the assets of the deceased in the last couple of years of her life and after her death.’

Deputy Master Linwood held Keats, though frail, was in a ‘lucid interval’ and so possessed the necessary mental capacity at the time of revocation. He found the solicitor’s attendance note, despite not recording the client’s nod, was ‘convincing’ and satisfied the Banks v Goodfellow test of the client intending to destroy the will and understanding the consequences of doing so.
Issue: 8096 / Categories: Legal News , Wills & Probate
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll