header-logo header-logo

28 March 2019 / Constance McDonnell KC
Issue: 7834 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

‘I don’t want my child to have a penny!’

How does testamentary freedom fit into recent decisions in 1975 Act claims? Constance McDonnell QC explains

  • There is no suggestion in post-Ilott cases of any form of presumption that testamentary wishes will prevail.

Now that the dust has begun to settle since the initial and occasionally volcanic reactions to the Supreme Court’s decision in Ilott v The Blue Cross  [2017] UKSC 17 in March 2017, it seems like a good moment to review how trial judges and (on one occasion) the Court of Appeal have treated testamentary freedom in non-spousal claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. Practitioners will recall the press headlines on the day of the judgment and during the following weeks trumpeting a triumph for testamentary freedom, which may have caused some concern for prospective claimants, but can claimants now be heartened by recent decisions?

It is worth setting the scene by noting two key points. First, there has always been something of a tension between on the

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: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll