ChatterBank1 min ago
can i contest the will?
12 Answers
hi my father passed away 3 years ago and passed his estate too my mother the joint will that they had at the time was that any and all assets would be sold and split 3 ways between myself and my siblings my mother recently passed away suddenly and her will which includes my dads estate is too be sold and split 6 ways too include one of my sisters husbands my mothers brother and my mothers brothers wife the ltter 2 re quite well off and live in australia.
are there any grounds too contest this my dad would never have wanted this too happen???
are there any grounds too contest this my dad would never have wanted this too happen???
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by arfurdaley. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
As others have indicated, your mother was free to leave her estate to whomever she wanted to. However you have the right to challenge the will but you would need to convince a court that you should receive 'reasonable financial provision'.
Quote:
"Where after the commencement of this Act a person dies domiciled in England and Wales and is survived by any of the following persons:—
. . .
(c)a child of the deceased;
. . .
that person may apply to the court for an order under section 2 of this Act on the ground that the disposition of the deceased’s estate effected by his will or the law relating to intestacy, or the combination of his will and that law, is not such as to make reasonable financial provision for the applicant.
. . .
In this Act “reasonable financial provision”—
. . .
means such financial provision as it would be reasonable in all the circumstances of the case for the applicant to receive for his maintenance
. . .
. . . the court shall, in determining whether the disposition of the deceased’s estate effected by his will or the law relating to intestacy, or the combination of his will and that law, is such as to make reasonable financial provision for the applicant and, if the court considers that reasonable financial provision has not been made, in determining whether and in what manner it shall exercise its powers under that section, have regard to the following matters, that is to say—
(a)the financial resources and financial needs which the applicant has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;
(b)the financial resources and financial needs which any other applicant for an order under section 2 of this Act has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;
(c)the financial resources and financial needs which any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;
(d)any obligations and responsibilities which the deceased had towards any applicant for an order under the said section 2 or towards any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased;
(e)the size and nature of the net estate of the deceased;
(f)any physical or mental disability of any applicant for an order under the said section 2 or any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased;
(g)any other matter, including the conduct of the applicant or any other person, which in the circumstances of the case the court may consider relevant."
http://www.legislatio...kpga/1975/63/contents
Chris
Quote:
"Where after the commencement of this Act a person dies domiciled in England and Wales and is survived by any of the following persons:—
. . .
(c)a child of the deceased;
. . .
that person may apply to the court for an order under section 2 of this Act on the ground that the disposition of the deceased’s estate effected by his will or the law relating to intestacy, or the combination of his will and that law, is not such as to make reasonable financial provision for the applicant.
. . .
In this Act “reasonable financial provision”—
. . .
means such financial provision as it would be reasonable in all the circumstances of the case for the applicant to receive for his maintenance
. . .
. . . the court shall, in determining whether the disposition of the deceased’s estate effected by his will or the law relating to intestacy, or the combination of his will and that law, is such as to make reasonable financial provision for the applicant and, if the court considers that reasonable financial provision has not been made, in determining whether and in what manner it shall exercise its powers under that section, have regard to the following matters, that is to say—
(a)the financial resources and financial needs which the applicant has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;
(b)the financial resources and financial needs which any other applicant for an order under section 2 of this Act has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;
(c)the financial resources and financial needs which any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;
(d)any obligations and responsibilities which the deceased had towards any applicant for an order under the said section 2 or towards any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased;
(e)the size and nature of the net estate of the deceased;
(f)any physical or mental disability of any applicant for an order under the said section 2 or any beneficiary of the estate of the deceased;
(g)any other matter, including the conduct of the applicant or any other person, which in the circumstances of the case the court may consider relevant."
http://www.legislatio...kpga/1975/63/contents
Chris
I say legal boys,
it depends on what the will says, innit ?
or what the wills say ?
If Arfur can show that Dad had left money to wifey so that she could or would on death leave what remained only to the three kids and no grasping relatives
then it would be enforced woulndt it on the grounds that a trust had been set up by the first will ?
So it depends on what the wills say
.so if it says that I leave my chattels and goods to my dear wifey absolutely to do what she likes with
then arfur is absolutely stiffada
huh ?
PP
it depends on what the will says, innit ?
or what the wills say ?
If Arfur can show that Dad had left money to wifey so that she could or would on death leave what remained only to the three kids and no grasping relatives
then it would be enforced woulndt it on the grounds that a trust had been set up by the first will ?
So it depends on what the wills say
.so if it says that I leave my chattels and goods to my dear wifey absolutely to do what she likes with
then arfur is absolutely stiffada
huh ?
PP
Eloquently put, peter.
=0)
And yes ...
If dad leaves the estate to mum FOR LIFE, with instructions as to what happens afterwards, then mum is bound by dad's instructions.
If dad leaves the estate to mum ABSOLUTELY, with instructions as to what happens afterwards, then mum is NOT bound by dad's instructions.
Which is what peter said. Although peter expressed it better than I did.
=0)
=0)
And yes ...
If dad leaves the estate to mum FOR LIFE, with instructions as to what happens afterwards, then mum is bound by dad's instructions.
If dad leaves the estate to mum ABSOLUTELY, with instructions as to what happens afterwards, then mum is NOT bound by dad's instructions.
Which is what peter said. Although peter expressed it better than I did.
=0)
It seems that after the death of your Father your Mother revoked the Joint will she had made and made another will leaving her estate, which included your late Father’s estate, to six beneficiaries rather than the three beneficiaries in the original joint will. As has been said by others she has the right to leave her estate how she wishes, even if she had not told you she had made a new will.
You can contest the will if you believe you have been unreasonably treated by the will, particularly if you were a dependant and the Judge will decide using the typically English compromise of what is reasonable and what the Judge thought the testator intended.
You can contest the will if you believe you have been unreasonably treated by the will, particularly if you were a dependant and the Judge will decide using the typically English compromise of what is reasonable and what the Judge thought the testator intended.
There's no such thing as a joint will. I think you mean mirror wills - i.e. the provisions in your father's and mother's wills at the time were the same. As already said, there is nothing to stop your mother changing her will after your father died (or before he died, for that matter). If you challenge it you risk a very large sum in legal costs unless you have a definite case of dependency.
No arfur. Partners cannot bind each other in their wills as to what happens after the death of one. Essentially your papa left his estate to mama. She must have written a new will. I know it sounds unfair and indeed immoral for mama to change what they had agreed as partners, but after he died the later will supercedes all others. Console yourself with the idea she may have left her estate to Battersea Dog's Home. Grab wot you're left and run.
Of course there is no such thing, as a joint will in the sense that it is made by two or more people, a will can only be individual as I think most people are aware. The term was used by AD who used it in the sense that the terms of the will were identical and both wills were probably made together, this would be obvious to most people reading the question.
1 to 12 of 12
