AN
INTERESTING CASE
WHERE THERE’S
A WILL THERE’S A WAY
Two adult
children wanted to challenge 4 wills made by their mother shortly before her
death in November 2007. Their mother died of brain cancer. But the two adult children alleged that she
lacked capacity, had want of knowledge and approval, and was the subject of
undue influence when making these wills…
They decided that they would seek professional advice and
help from ABD solicitor Peter Shah who is the firm’s resident partner based at
ABD Royal Wootton Bassett offices. Peter specialises in litigious matters and
contentious probate.
The main asset of their mother’s estate was the majority
shareholding in her private limited company worth several million pounds.
In 1993 she made a will simply leaving her estate to her 4 children.
That will would be superseded by the 4
later wills made in September and October 2007 when she
left her shares in the estate into a discretionary trust which could have meant
the two adult children would receive nothing.
The executors of the estate maintained that these 4 wills
were valid. There was a considerable
amount of documentation to take into account including sizeable medical
records, the papers of the previous solicitors who had drafted the wills, and
the wills themselves which were complex documents. What made matters worse was that one of the
executors was their mother’s husband (not their father) who had benefited from
a transfer of shares shortly before his wife died at a significant undervalue.
Having maintained the stance that there were no concessions,
mediation took place in May 2010 to see if a settlement could be reached. Some progress on that front was made but then
the other side withdrew from the mediation process. A report was obtained from
an Old Age Consultant Psychiatrist to comment on the Deceased’s state of mind
when she made the wills which were the subject matter of legal challenge. Whilst his report was not unequivocal it
provided some useful pointers when court proceedings were finally issued in the
High Court at the end of 2010. A defence was served by the other side, and
directions for the conduct of the case were made whereby it was set down for
Trial for 19 days to be heard in April.
However, at the end of 2011 after 4 years wrangling, the
other side indicated that they would not contest the claim being brought by the
two adult children which meant that the 2007 wills were set aside and
subsequently the 1993 admitted to probate.
Peter fought a hard legal battle on behalf of his clients and,
whatever the reasons, the other side had to concede the claim and the actions
of the two adult children were wholly justified with thanks to Peter.
