header-logo header-logo

11 March 2010 / Michael Tringham
Issue: 7407 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Double family intestacy

Michael Tringham traces the expensive consequences of avoiding a bill

The Booth family’s probate troubles started with a £7,000 builder’s bill that farmer Edward Booth preferred not to pay. It has reached a Jarndyce-like finale—compounded by intestacy, allegations of forgery, secret gifts, false under-valuation, bankruptcy, even an illegitimacy, three separate trials—and an estimated six figures in legal costs, according to losing litigant Norman Booth, who told the Huddersfield Daily Examiner: “I shall have to pay [my siblings] out but there will be nothing left for nobody because the fees have to come out of the estate.”

Looking behind the legal reasons why Norman Booth lost his appeal against his siblings’ claim based on their mother’s intestacy shows how, from one small event —itself long since settled—unexpected consequences may flow.

Almost 40 years ago Edward Booth bought Silver Ings Farm in Skelmanthorpe, West Yorkshire, of which he was the tenant, from the Saville Estate. By the 1980s he had entered into a farming partnership with his son Norman. Around 1982 he engaged a local builder

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

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll