header-logo header-logo

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

A bitter dispute

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll