header-logo header-logo

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

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll