An adult stepson of the deceased, who had been treated as a child of the family, was awarded a lump sum of andpound;15,000 to enable him and his wife to avoid the burden of taking on a mortgage of andpound;13,000 on the purchase of their council house at a most advantageous price. ‘I have to look at the circumstances of this particular case, and, having done so, I am left in no doubt whatever that the effect of the deceased’s intestacy is such that it is unreasonable inasmuch as it makes no financial provision for the plaintiff’s needs.’ and he made that provision by way of a lump sum: ‘That is the order which the plaintiff seeks, because he wishes to buy this house without the burden of a mortgage weighing upon him for the remainder of his working years. In my judgment that is a reasonable requirement for his maintenance.’ The claimant had demonstrated a need: ‘the decision to buy has been a difficult one for the plaintiff to make; without any capital behind him, he has been reluctant to commit himself to this expense. It will mean that he will have to service the mortgage for the remainder of his working life. But he has now decided to buy, regardless of the outcome of this application.’
Judges:
Booth J
Citations:
[1985] Fam 1, [1984] 3 All ER 790
Statutes:
Inheritance (Provision for Family and dependants) Act 1975
Cited by:
Cited – Harlow v National Westminster Bank Plc and Others; in re Jennings Dec CA 13-Dec-1993
The adult non-dependent son of the deceased claimed provision from his father’s estate. He had been separated from his father since being a young child, and had received almost nothing. He was a married adult son living with his family in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family, Wills and Probate
Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.214191