The court retried an action disputing the validity of the will, new evidence having emerged post trial. The doubtful signature was explained by witnesses who said that he had been assisted. Held: The matter might have been handled better, but the testator knew the contents of his will, and signed it. Judges: Vos J Citations: … Continue reading Barrett v Bem and Others: ChD 19 May 2011
The court was asked as to the understanding of th edeceased when he made his will. Letters, found in the house, were produced and the court now asked whether they could be used in evidence. Held: such letters were not admissible unless connected in evidence witb some act done by the testator. Citations: [1837] EngR … Continue reading Wright v Doe Dem Sandford Tatham: KBD 13 Jun 1837
A married couple had purported to make mirror wills, but by mistake had each executed the will of the other. Rectification was now sought. Held: The will did not comply with the 1837 Act and should not be admitted to probate. The testator had not intended to sign the document he had in fact signed. … Continue reading Marley v Rawlings and Another: ChD 3 Feb 2011
(High Court of Australia) Cases of mutual wills are only one example of a wider category of cases, for example secret trusts, in which a court of equity will intervene to impose a constructive trust. Latham CJ described a mutual will arrangement as ‘a trust which is declared by the law to affect the conscience … Continue reading Birmingham v Renfrew: 11 Jun 1937
References: (1937) 57 CLR 666, [1937] HCA 52 Links: Austlii Coram: Dixon J, Latham CJ Ratio: (High Court of Australia) Cases of mutual wills are only one example of a wider category of cases, for example secret trusts, in which a court of equity will intervene to impose a constructive trust. Latham CJ described a … Continue reading Birmingham v Renfrew; 11 Jun 1937
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Letters of administration had been taken out, but it was subsequently discovered that the deceased, a seamen, may have made a nuncupative will which would be valid if made at sea. He had said: ‘You listen to me. If anything happens to me, I want everything to go to Auntie Anne.’ and later ‘What I … Continue reading Ayling v Summers and Others: ChD 14 Sep 2009
Mr and Mrs Rawlings had made wills in substantially similar format, but, mistakenly, they each executed the will intended for the other. After Mr Rawling died, the family disputed whether he had made a will. Mrs Rawling applied for rectification of the document signed by her late husband, and now appealed against rejection of her … Continue reading Marley v Rawlings and Another: CA 2 Feb 2012
A husband and wife had each executed the will which had been prepared for the other, owing to an oversight on the part of their solicitor; the question which arose was whether the will of the husband, who died after his wife, was valid. The parties disputed whether the will have been validly executed, and … Continue reading Marley v Rawlings and Another: SC 22 Jan 2014
The claimant sought rectification of a will. The respondents argued that any mistake was not a clerical one so as to bring it within section 20. The gift of residue had left sixty per cent undisposed of. It was said that the will had referred to shares of one tenth and one twentieth, when it … Continue reading Clarke v Brothwood and others; In re Clarke: ChD 16 Nov 2006
The husband and wife had made mirror wills. They divorced, and the husband made a new will. After his death, the child and the third wife of the deceased made a claim against the second wife. Held: The wills were in identical terms, but nevertheless, fell short of having full and explicit status as mutual … Continue reading Goodchild v Goodchild: ChD 13 Dec 1995
The testator, a divorcee had already made a will leaving his estate to his wife, with a proviso that if she predeceased him or did not survive him for one month his estate should go to the Imperial Cancer Research Fund. He died in 1963. His former wife survived him and claimed under the will. … Continue reading In Re Sinclair, deceased: CA 1985
The court considered the difference between an obligation accepted in law, and what was described as ‘an honourable engagement’. Judges: Lord Loughborough LC, Lord Camden L.C Citations: (1797) 3 Ves Jun 402, [1797] EngR 489, (1797) 3 Ves Jun 402, (1797) 30 ER 1076 Links: Commonlii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Lord … Continue reading Lord Walpole v Lord Orford: HL 1797
Land having been conveyed under the Act, and it no longer being needed as a school, it had to be decided to whom the land reverted. Held: The tracing of beneficiaries had to be in the basis under section 2, that the land had never been so conveyed. It would so have passed not as … Continue reading Rector of Wrington and The Bath and Wells Diocesan Board of Finance v Jenkinson and Others: ChD 26 Feb 2002
Citations: [2006] EWHC 2561 (Ch) Statutes: Administration of Justice Act 1982 20 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Marley v Rawlings and Another ChD 3-Feb-2011 A married couple had purported to make mirror wills, but by mistake had each executed the will of the other. Rectification was now sought. Held: The will did … Continue reading Re Price: ChD 2006
(Royal Court of Jersey) The court considered a request for the rectification of a will: ‘To summarize, the common law of England recognized a power in the court to delete words from a will which were included by mistake but did not allow for power in the court to rectify by altering or adding to … Continue reading Re Vautier: 2000
The will left property to a female beneficiary. Later, but before the death of the testator, she married one of the witnesses. Held: Section 15 should be construed narrowly. The gift remained effective. Citations: (1881) 6 QBD 311 Statutes: Wills Act 1837 15 Wills and Probate Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.182728
Cases of mutual wills are only one example of a wider category of cases, for example secret trusts, in which a court of equity will intervene to impose a constructive trust. Nourse J said: ‘The principle of all these cases is that a court of equity will not permit a person to whom property is … Continue reading In re Cleaver dec’d, Cleaver v Insley: ChD 1981
(New Zealand Court of Appeal) The Court admitted a will to probate, omitting words naming the testatrix. Fair J said: ‘but it is submitted on behalf of the defendants, who are entitled under the intestacy, that it is not admissible to probate on the ground that it was not executed animo testandi- that is, that … Continue reading Guardian Trust and Executors Company of New Zealand Ltd v Inwood and Others: 1946
Two sisters made mirror codicils to their wills but each then executed that of the other sister. Held: The dispositions contained in them were invalid. Sir Gorell Barnes P said: ‘But it is quite clear that this lady, though her signature is on the document, never meant to sign this particular codicil at all. She … Continue reading Re Meyer: 1908
(British Columbia Supreme Court) Citations: [1952] 6 WWR (NS) 702 Cited by: Cited – Marley v Rawlings and Another ChD 3-Feb-2011 A married couple had purported to make mirror wills, but by mistake had each executed the will of the other. Rectification was now sought. Held: The will did not comply with the 1837 Act … Continue reading Re Brander: 1952
Two sisters had made similar, but not mirror, wills and by mistake each executed that of the other. Held: The will was invalid. Sir J Hannen said ‘A paper has been signed as this lady’s will, which, as it happens, if treated as her will, would to a great extent, although not entirely, carry out … Continue reading In the Goods of Hunt: 1875
A testatrix revoked her earlier will and, by an oversight and contrary to the testatrix’s instructions, her solicitor had failed to repeat in her later will, provisions of the earlier will exercising a testamentary power of appointment. The clerical error was due to an error in the process of recording the testator’s instructions, not in … Continue reading Wordingham v Royal Exchange Trust Co Ltd and Another: ChD 6 May 1992
The testator had given instructions for his will and received a draft will. The judge had found that he had capacity to make the will when he gave instructions but not when it was executed. The will having been made in accordance with his instructions, it was upheld, applying Parker v Felgate. The appellant, challenging … Continue reading Perrins v Holland and Others; In re Perrins, deceased: CA 21 Jul 2010
The testator had become infirm and unable to sign his name. He had made a stamp which reproduced his signature. He used it to execute his will. The will was challenged. Held: The will had been validly executed. The requirement of the Act could be fulfilled by somebody else executing a document on the direction … Continue reading Jenkins v Gaisford, Re Jenkins (deceased)’s goods: ChD 1863
D, who was in hospital and near death, said to R (his former partner): ‘The house is yours, Margaret. You have the keys. They are in your bag. The deeds are in the steel box.’ After D’s death R discovered that D had put had put into her bag the only key to a steel … Continue reading Sen v Headley: CA 28 Feb 1991
There had been donationes mortis causa of the money standing in four accounts, by the delivery of a Post Office Savings Bank book and three other bank books of various descriptions. Lord Evershed MR stated: ‘the courts will examine any case of alleged donatio mortis causa and reject it if in truth what is alleged … Continue reading Birch v Treasury Solicitor: CA 1950
The deceased, a solicitor of long standing, was said to have signed his will without having read it, and had two witnesses sign the document without them knowing what they were attesting. He had remarried, and the will was challenged by his children. The judge had held the will invalidly executed. Held: The appeal succeeded. … Continue reading Sherrington v Sherrington: CA 22 Mar 2005
The parties had disputed the validity of a will, and the successful wife of the deceased argued that her costs should be paid by those challenging the will rather than from the estate. Held: The solicitors (or their insurers) who had made the error should bear the costs of such an action. However, the contingency … Continue reading Marley v Rawlings and Another (2): SC 18 Sep 2014
A mistake was made in the drafting of a codicil by which, inter alia, the testatrix had revoked cl 7 of her will. It was clear from the evidence that the testatrix had never intended to revoke the whole of that clause but only to revoke the pecuniary legacy given by cl 7(iv). The error … Continue reading In re Morris Deceased: ChD 1970
The claimant disputed her mother’s will which left everything to her brother, challenging its execution. She said that the second witness had not been present when the will was signed. Held: The will stood. Where a will appeared to be properly executed, the strongest evidence was required to counter the presumption in law of due … Continue reading Kentfield v Wright: ChD 1 Jul 2010
The claimant owned a house by the river Thames at Hedsor Water. Public rights of navigation existed over the Thames from time immemorial, and its management lay with the respondent. Landowners at Hedsor had sought to assert that that stretch was now private. She appealed an order declaring the continued public rights. Held: The applicant … Continue reading Rowland v The Environment Agency: CA 19 Dec 2003
The burden of proof which falls on a disappointed beneficiary who seeks rectification of the will, saying that the will did not give effect to a testator’s intentions, is an exacting one.
Chadwick J said: ‘Although the standard of proof . .
