header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
29 April 2016 / Henrietta Mason , Paola Fudakowska
Issue: 7696 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Widow’s peak

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Henrietta Mason & Paola Fudakowska provide a wills & probate update

“Life must be lived forwards, but can only be understood backwards.”

This update deals with two recent decisions under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the 1975 Act), both of which were brought by widows who were unsuccessful in their claims.

Kebbeh v Farmer

Kebbeh v Farmer [2015] EWHC 3827 (Ch), [2015] All ER (D) 257 (Dec) addressed the question of domicile in a spouse 1975 Act claim.

Malcolm Mitchell had a domicile of origin in England, where he was married and had two daughters. By 1994 this marriage had been dissolved and he was based primarily in Gambia.

In 1999 he met the claimant, Haddy Kebbeh, a Gambian citizen 30 years his junior. They married in a Muslim ceremony in 2000 and Mitchell’s third child, Jennifer, was born in England in 2001. There were difficulties in the marriage from a relatively early stage. On 5 May 2006 Mr Mitchell made a will leaving his residuary estate to be divided equally between

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
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll