Settlement Does Not Prevent Will Challenge

When a dependant of a deceased person is unexpectedly not provided for under the will, the normal course of action is to bring a claim against the deceased’s estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

However, the reason why the person was not provided for may also give cause for challenging the will.

In a recent case, a man who was excluded from benefiting from his father’s will, which was created three days before he died, brought a claim against the estate under the Act. The claim was settled by a consent order.

The man believed that his father’s will was invalid and claimed that his father lacked testamentary capacity (i.e. was not ‘of sound mind’) when the will was written, so he then went to court to have the will ruled invalid.

The executor of the will opposed his application on the basis that it would be inequitable and an abuse of process since the man had already obtained an agreed settlement. In effect, the argument was that the earlier consent order should stop him from having a second bite of the cherry.

On appeal, the court allowed the challenge to proceed: the payment to the son did not mean that he had accepted the validity of the will.

Although correct at the time of publication, the contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article. Please contact us for the latest legal position.

Legal news

Video Update: Shared Parental Leave & Ante Natel Leave
Separated But Not Divorced? Your Estate May Pass to Your Ex
BYOD 'Bring Your Own Device' Guidance
Gas Safety Note for Landlords
Hospital to Blame for Grandmother's Flesh-Eating Bug Death
Win A Place In This Year's Kentish Killer
Video Update: Commission & Holiday Pay
Open Justice Trumps Trustees' Fears for Children
Police Assault Victim Wins Over £100,000 Damages
Employment Tribunal Treated Psychotic Litigant Unfairly