header-logo header-logo

18 July 2014 / Henrietta Mason , Paola Fudakowska
Issue: 7615 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Striking a fair balance

Henrietta Mason & Paola Fudakowska provide an update on disputed probate cases

In King v Dubrey and others [2014] EWHC 2083 (Ch) the deceased made a will in 1998 leaving £19,000 in legacies to friends and relatives, and her residuary estate to a number of animal charities. The main asset in her estate was a property in Hertfordshire, worth approximately £350,000 at the time of trial, into which her nephew, Mr King, moved to look after her in 2007.

On 19 November 2010, 4 February 2011 and 24 March 2011, the deceased prepared various documents to the effect that King should have the property when she died. None of the documents constituted a valid will in law. King stated that, in around late 2010/early 2011, the deceased presented him with the deeds to the property and said to him: “This will be yours when I go.” King claimed to have taken the deeds and put them into his wardrobe.

King claimed that the deceased, who died on 10 April 2011, had

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll