header-logo header-logo

The video will execution regime: a half measure?

27 October 2020 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7908 / Categories: Opinion , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail
An emergency measure has been introduced for the witnessing of wills, but Nicholas Bevan believes there’s been a missed opportunity

On 7 September this year the justice secretary published the Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020 (the Order) (https://bit.ly/2G5jySQ). This is an emergency COVID-19 executive measure which sanctions the use of video conferencing technology to witness the making of wills over the internet.

The Order provides, for the first time, a statutory definition of ‘presence’ in s 9(c) and (d) of the Wills Act 1837 (WA 1837) ( https://bit.ly/37GL3NP). These provisions require a testator’s signature to be undertaken in the simultaneous ‘presence’ of two witnesses and for their attestation signatures also to be made in the testator’s ‘presence’.

Section 2(3) of the Order, temporarily amends WA 1837 by inserting: ‘…“presence” includes presence by means of videoconference or other visual transmission.’ This definition is given retrospective effect from 31 January 2020, but for two years only.

This statutory amendment

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