header-logo header-logo

27 October 2017 / Steve Evans
Issue: 7767 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Drafting matters post-Ilott

As the dust settles on Ilott, Steve Evans reflects on what has & what hasn’t changed

  • Freedom of testamentary disposition— what regard is to be had to a deceased’s wishes as forcefully expressed in a written note?

Human interest stories of family squabbles attract media attention, and Heather Ilott’s 13-year legal struggle to receive provision from her estranged mother’s estate certainly excited the media. The litigation culminated in the Supreme Court decision in March of this year in Ilott v The Blue Cross, the RSPB, and RSPCA [2017] UKSC 17, in which the appellant charities succeeded in overturning the Court of Appeal’s award in favour of Mrs Ilott, the estranged daughter of Melita Jackson, who had left all of her estate to animal charities with which she had no particular connection. This was the first time the Supreme Court had considered the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

The media coverage—at times superficial, ill informed, and bordering on hysterical—clearly favoured the charities, and placed great significance on freedom of testamentary disposition. An impecunious daughter who

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

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