header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

The video will execution regime: a half measure?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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 is

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Kennedys—Samson Spanier

Kennedys—Samson Spanier

Commercial disputes practice bolstered by partner hire

Bird & Bird—Emma Radcliffe

Bird & Bird—Emma Radcliffe

London competition team expands with collective actions specialist hire

Hill Dickinson—Chris Williams

Hill Dickinson—Chris Williams

Commercial dispute resolution team in London welcomes partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: What judging really demands
Judging is ‘more intellectually demanding than any other role in public life’—and far messier than outsiders imagine. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC reflects on decades spent wrestling with unclear legislation, fragile precedent and human fallibility
NLJ this week: AI comes for the billable hour
The long-predicted death of the billable hour may finally be here—and this time, it’s armed with a scythe. In a sweeping critique of time-based billing, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, argues in this week's NLJ that artificial intelligence has made hourly charging ‘intellectually, commercially and ethically indefensible’
NLJ this week: Civil procedure—sharp elbows & sharper warnings
From fake authorities to rent reform, the civil courts have had a busy start to 2026. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold surveys a procedural landscape where guidance, discretion and discipline are all under strain
NLJ this week: Getting the facts right in family courts
Fact-finding hearings remain a fault line in private family law. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Rylatt and Robyn Laye of Anthony Gold Solicitors analyse recent appeals exposing the dangers of rushed or fragmented findings
NLJ this week: Sporting justice—at sprint speed
As the Winter Olympics open in Milan and Cortina, legal disputes are once again being resolved almost as fast as the athletes compete. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys examines the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s (CAS's) ad hoc divisions, which can decide cases within 24 hours
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll