header-logo header-logo

A regrettable blunder

07 April 2011 / Alexander Learmonth KC
Issue: 7460 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Alexander Learmonth investigates an unusual case of two wills being signed & executed by the wrong testators

The recent decision in Marley v Rawlings [2011] EWHC 161 (Ch), [2011] All ER (D) 43 (Feb), raised an interesting point of principle: could the power to rectify a will under s 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 (AJA 1982) be used to cure a defect of execution of a will?  Could such an error be categorised as a “clerical error”?

The facts are simple but, one hopes, unusual. Mr and Mrs Rawlings wished to make mirror wills, each leaving everything to the other, and the survivor leaving everything to their carer, and quasi-adopted son Mr Marley. But when the solicitor supervised the execution of these wills, he handed Mr Rawlings the will intended for Mrs Rawlings and vice-versa, and each signed and executed the wrong will. Neither the solicitor nor his secretary witnessing the execution spotted the error, and it was not picked up on the death of Mrs Rawlings, whose property passed

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll