Michael Tringham reports on the dangers of cutting & pasting
When a new private client partner brought his firm’s will precedents “up to date”, it inadvertently brought the legatees of their client Mrs Joyce Austin to court. Under her 1993 will, the family home in Harborne, Birmingham, was to pass “absolutely” to her daughter Caroline, the claimant in Austin v Woodward & Anr [2011] EWHC 2458 (Ch). The consequence of introducing the new precedents when that will was updated in 2003 was that the property “would pass into residue in which [the daughter] has a life interest, with the remainder to the defendants”—the testator’s two grandchildren.
Mr Daniel Alexander QC, sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court, heard “unchallenged evidence” including: documents discovered by the claimant indicating that her mother had not changed her intentions from the earlier will; and an explanation by a former partner in the law firm as to instructions that were—and were not—given when the new will was prepared. The judge noted: “The testator did not indicate any intention to
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
