Baynes v Hedger and others [2008] EWHC 1587 (Ch), [2008] All ER (D) 175 (Jul)
(i) Under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975), the court has to decide: (a) whether, looked at objectively, the will failed to make reasonable provision for the claimant’s maintenance in all the circumstances of the case; and (b) if so, to what extent (if at all) should the court exercise its powers under I(PFD)A 1975? The first question is a value judgment; the second is a question of discretion.
(ii) In deciding whether or not two people have lived together in the same household during the whole of the requisite two year period, the court’s attention is not confined to that two-year period, in so far as previous events explain what was happening within that period. Nor, if two people are living in the same household will they necessarily stop doing so merely because they are temporarily physically separated.
(iii) A sum awarded to pay a claimant’s debts will not fall within the concept of “maintenance” unless the payment of those debts enables the claimant to derive a future income which he could not do if the debts remain unpaid, or the debts represent living expenses incurred since the death of the deceased.
(iv) I(PFD)A 1975 requires the claimant to establish that the deceased “was making” a contribution immediately before death, and so the outright gift of a house many years ago cannot constitute maintenance even if the claimant continued to live in it, since the house became the claimant’s asset, to be used however the claimant wished.
