header-logo header-logo

The predatory marriage trap

26 March 2020 / James McKean , Andrew Bishop
Issue: 7880 / Categories: Features , Family , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail
18317
James McKean, Andrew Bishop & Hollie Richardson highlight the morality & dangers of predatory marriage & probate
  • Individuals without mental capacity can be ensnared in predatory marriages, in this jurisdiction and abroad.
  • Following an unfortunate change to the law in 1971, these marriages are voidable, not void, and cannot be challenged after death. They allow spouses to take the benefit of the intestacy rules. Beneficiaries under any previous wills are disinherited, and largely without recourse.
  • Practitioners should be alert to the testamentary effects of marriage and consider capacity to marry just as they consider capacity to make a will.

The concept of ‘predatory marriage’ may not mean a great deal to English lawyers, and certainly not probate practitioners. But it is a phenomenon which can have serious and permanent testamentary effects.

Take an individual (henceforth ‘A’), whose mental capacity is in doubt. If A marries, the effect of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s 12(c), is that the marriage will not be void, but rather voidable—as in contract

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

Slater Heelis—Chester office

Slater Heelis—Chester office

North West presence strengthened with Chester office launch

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Firm grows commercial disputes expertise with partner promotion

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

NEWS
The House of Lords has set up a select committee to examine assisted dying, which will delay the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill
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
back-to-top-scroll