Claims of undue involve allegations that someone has made a will in such terms they would not have otherwise made had they not been subject to someone’s undue influence.
However, these claims rarely succeed given that a claimant would have to prove that actual undue influence took place and is “inconsistent with any other hypothesis” as to why the will was drafted in certain terms.
Forgery
If a will is not signed or acknowledged by the person purported to have made it, then it goes without saying that it will be invalid.
In cases involving allegations of forgery, the court will usually require a forensic examination report by a handwriting expert to help determine the issue.
Financial provision claims
It is possible to seek a greater share of an estate where there is a valid will or intestacy by pursuing a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.
The 1975 Act, as it is commonly known, allows certain categories of claimant to apply to court to seek financial provision from an estate.
The categories of claimant include:
- Spouses and civil partners of the person who died (as well as former spouses and civil partners);
- Anyone who, for the last two years of the deceased’s life, was living in the same household as them as their husband or wife;
- A child of the deceased;
- A child treated as a “child of the family”;
- Any person who immediately prior to the death of the deceased was being maintained by them.
There have been a flurry of 1975 Act cases in recent years.
While many cases have been successful, the courts have stressed that the legislation is not designed to compensate disappointed beneficiaries or provide vast windfalls, but rather to do “the minimum equity to do justice”.
As part of any 1975 Act claims, claimants are required to set out in detail their financial means, in order to demonstrate that the provision made for them (or not made for them) by a will or intestacy is not sufficient for their particular set of needs. Each case will be assessed on its own particular facts.
The Supreme Court recently heard its first appeal in relation to a 1975 Act claim in the case of Ilott v Mitson.
In this case an estranged adult daughter brought a claim for financial provision against her mother’s estate.
It is worth noting that the deceased intentionally excluded her daughter from benefitting under her will and instead left her estate to a number of charities.
