header-logo header-logo

23 May 2014 / Jonathan Steinert , Paris Aboro
Issue: 7607 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Constructing rectification

 Jonathan Steinert & Paris Aboro examine the Supreme Court’s approach to the rectification of a will

In the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Marley v Rawlings [2014] UKSC 2, [2014] 1 All ER 807 it was held that, where a husband and wife had mistakenly signed one another’s draft wills, as a result of a clerical error, the court was able to intervene and rectify the wills in order to give effect to the intentions of the testator.

Background

In May 1999, Mr and Mrs Rawlings were visited by their solicitor in order that they could execute the wills he had drafted on their instructions. The wills were short and were drafted in largely identical terms, as “mirror wills”. By their terms, each spouse left his or her entire estate to the other, but, if the other had predeceased, the entire estate was left to the appellant, Mr Marley, to whom the couple were not related but had treated as a son.

By an oversight on the part of the solicitor, each spouse

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll