Re Flynn: 1968

The court had to decide on the intentions of the deceased with regard to domicile: ‘In one sense there is no end to the evidence that may be adduced; for the whole of a man’s life and all that he has said and done, however trivial, may be prayed in aid in determining what his intention was at any given moment of time. The state of a man’s mind may be as much a fact as the state of his digestion, but, as Harman LJ is reputed to have observed, ‘the doctors know precious little about the one and the judges know nothing about the other.” and ‘Acquisition and abandonment are correlatives . . When animus and factum are each no more, domicile perishes also; for there is nothing to sustain it. If a man has already departed from the country, his domicile of choice there will continue so long as he has the necessary animus.’

Judges:

Megarry J

Citations:

[1968] 1 WLR 103

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedUdny v Udny HL 1869
Revival of domicile of origin after loss of choice
The House considered the domicile of the respondent’s father at the time of the respondent’s birth. The father had been born in Scotland but had left Scotland and taken a lease of a house in London. He had a castle in Scotland but that was not . .

Cited by:

CitedMorgan As Attorney of Sir Peter Shaffer v Cilento, Shaffer, Shaffer, Shaffer, and Minutolo ChD 9-Feb-2004
The deceased, a playwright had moved to Australia in his last years, though he returned to and died in London. The claimants sought provision from his estate, but it was argued that he had changed domicile to Australia, and that the 1975 Act did not . .
See AlsoRe Flynn (no 2) 1969
An acknowledgement of title to restart a limitation period must be precisely focused on a disputed right. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.196842