header-logo header-logo

11 November 2010 / Paola Fudakowska , Adam Cloherty , Paul Hewitt
Issue: 7441 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Making amends

Paul Hewitt, Paola Fudakowska & Adam Cloherty report on declining capacity, mutual wills & rectification

In Perrins v Holland [2010] EWCA Civ 840, the Court of Appeal reinforced and approved the well-known rule in Parker v Felgate (1883) LR 8 PD 171.

In April 2000, when he had testamentary capacity, R gave instructions for a will revoking a former will in D’s favour and leaving his entire estate to A. However, in September 2001, when he finally executed the will, R no longer had full capacity—although it was read and summarised to him, he approved it, and it continued to represent his testamentary intentions. At first instance, applying Parker v Felgate, Lewison J held that the will was therefore valid.

D appealed to the Court of Appeal, submitting that (i) the decision in Parker v Felgate was wrong; (ii) by definition R could not have known and approved of the will when executing it if he lacked full capacity at that time; and (iii) in applying the Parker v Felgate, Lewison

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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