header-logo header-logo

29 September 2023 / Mark Pawlowski
Issue: 8042 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Promises, promises: mutual wills & estoppel

139628
Mark Pawlowski asks whether proprietary estoppel can be used to underpin the enforcement of mutual wills
  • There is no reason why proprietary estoppel could not be applied, in appropriate cases, to resolve the problems associated with oral agreements intended to give rise to mutual wills which do not comply with s 2(1) of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989.

Mutual wills arise where two parties (usually husband and wife) make wills, pursuant to a binding agreement, in similar form in each other’s favour on terms that the survivor will not revoke his or her will after the death of the other. The doctrine operates on the basis that each testator provides consideration for the other’s promise by making his or her will in the agreed terms and not altering it to the date of death. In other words, the traditional view is that there must be a binding legal contract between the two testators for the doctrine to apply: see, for example, Re Goodchild [1997] 3 All

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll