header-logo header-logo

05 August 2016 / Rawdon Crozier
Issue: 7710 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

The vindictive beneficiary

nlj_7710_crozier

Rawdon Crozier reflects on mixed messages & disclaimer by conduct

  • Conflicting lines of authority about what is required for a disclaimer to become irrevocable & therefore effective.
  • What is the requisite intention for disclaimer?

The story of the “dog in a manger”, is, like almost every other fable, generally credited to Aesop and, like almost every other fable, has a plot of the utmost simplicity: a dog climbs into a mangerful of hay and guards it fiercely against the cows, goats, horses and any other animal that might benefit from eating its contents. When a horse, reasonably, points out that the dog only eats meat and asks why the dog is guarding the hay so vigorously, the dog replies: “So no-one else can eat it.”

Sometimes a beneficiary under a will or on an intestacy can behave like the dog of the fable—the “Fable of the vindictive beneficiary” might run as follows:

  • An unhappy family consisted of a mother, two children and a husband, step-father to the children, whom he did not like.
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