header-logo header-logo

A bitter dispute

27 April 2007 / Tracy Harris
Issue: 7270 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

The Rolling Stones banker and a question of trust. Tracy Harris reports

Post-death disputes over the provisions of wills have become an increasingly regular feature of the law reports and the press. A combination of sharp increases in real property values and a wider readiness to seek legal redress for perceived inheritance injustices has contributed to a heightened awareness of some long-available remedies. Often the legal and emotional issues are complex, as in Cox-Johnson v Cox-Johnson and Others, concerning the estate of Richard Cox-Johnson, dubbed the Rolling Stones’ banker by the press, where personal e-mails and a secret video recording proved both newsworthy and of central legal significance.

In principle, testators can leave their assets to whomever they wish, but the provisions of their will can be challenged after their death.

CHALLENGING WILLS

If the testator has testamentary capacity, their knowledge and approval of the will is usually assumed from the fact that the testator has signed and had it attested in proper form. However, if the court’s suspicion is aroused the burden of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll