Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in probate proceedings where executors applied to cancel a grant of probate in respect of a will made by the deceased in 2012, accedes to the application, on the grounds that: the deceased, on foot of incorrect advice from his solicitor, destroyed a will made by him in 2015; the doctrine of dependant relative revocation applied in circumstances where the deceased’s intention to revoke the 2015 will was conditional on his belief that doing so would revive his 2012 will; and the purported revocation of the 2015 will was not legally valid.
Probate - deceased - Succession Act 1965 - application to cancel and recall a grant of probate - deceased made two wills - first will dated September 2012 - second will dated July 2015 - second will formally revoked first will - deceased destroyed 2015 will on the belief that the 2012 will would be revived - incorrect advice from his solicitor - beneficiary included in 2015 will was not included in 2012 will - deceased wanted to remove extra beneficiary from his will and so destroyed the 2015 will - executors sought to administer estate in accordance with his actual last will and testament - opposition concerned that the distribution of the deceased's estate would be contrary to the known intention of the deceased - the doctrine of dependant relative revocation - 2015 will remained valid - a will must be re-excuted in accordance with the act or a codicil must be executed demonstrating a clear intention to revive the will in question - 2012 will revoked and 2015 will admitted to probate
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.