The Supreme Court has preserved the estate in a case on whether the costs of a will dispute should be borne by the losing party, the estate of the deceased or the solicitor’s insurer.
Marley v Rawlings [2014] UKSC 51, concerned the wills of Mr and Mrs Rawlings who wished to leave their estates to each other or, if predeceased, to Terry Marley, a friend who they treated as their son. In an oversight by their solicitor, however, each signed the other’s will. If intestate, the sons would inherit the £70,000 estate. However, the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal, and held the will was valid.
The sons contended that the costs should come out of the estate, or be met by the solicitor. Marley argued the case should be treated as ordinary hostile litigation and the losing party should pay. The solicitor’s insurers, who made submissions in the case, argued that the losing party should pay. However, the court held unanimously that the solicitor’s insurers should bear the cost.
Giving the lead judgment, Lord Neuberger said the position of the solicitor could not be ignored in this case as the problem arose as a result of the solicitor’s negligence. Marley had a “clear claim in tort” against the solicitor and, since the solicitor “has no defence whatsoever to a damages claim from Mr Marley…this is a particularly strong case for holding a third party liable for costs”. He added: “One should hesitate long and hard” before directing costs be paid from the estate where the estate is modest.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=28793f10_1)
