header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Remote witnessing of wills

04 June 2020
Issue: 7889 / Categories: Legal News , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail
The accepted view that a testamentary witness must be physically present is ‘misconceived’, solicitor Nicholas Bevan argues in this week’s NLJ

Bevan, who recently supervised the ‘first online remote execution of a will’, says there is ‘near uniform consensus within the legal profession’ that s 9 of the Wills Act 1837 insists on the physical presence of witnesses. Bevan writes: ‘It clearly does not.’

Strangely, s 9 is both more ancient and more modern than the 1837 Act. It has its origins in 1677 and its last iteration was substituted by the Administration of Justice Act 1982. Bevan’s argument traces a line of case authorities interpreting the statutory formalities for a valid will in light of various technological advances. He concludes that a statutory intervention to permit the remote witnessing of a will is not required because the law already allows this.

He concludes: ‘Given that video evidence can be now be adduced in criminal and civil trials it seems oddly anachronistic to trenchantly insist that this 1982 Act requires nothing less than a close physical attendance, when the provision itself is silent on the point and when not a single case authority supports that proposition.’

Bevan has written an open letter to Alex Chalk MP, at the Ministry of Justice, arguing the case for a practice direction to set good standards.

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