header-logo header-logo

A matter of trust

22 September 2017 / Alison Regan
Issue: 6672 / Categories: Features , Charities , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

The charitable legacy—how far should a charity go to protect it, asks Alison Regan

  • Wills drafted by a solicitor are less likely to be challenged.
  • Charity trustees are obliged to act in the best interests of the charity.

The press has recently reported on the sad case of Tracy Leaning, an animal lover who, in 2007, drafted a will benefitting the Dog’s Trust, World Animal Protection, Friends of the Animals and Heart Research UK. Legacy income provides crucial support for these charitable objectives—objectives that Tracy clearly wanted to advance. However life changes.

According to reports, after 2007 Tracy met a partner and then became ill. After being diagnosed with cancer in 2014 Tracy seemingly changed her will to benefit her partner (provided he looked after her dogs) cutting out the charities.

The Dog’s Trust has unusually (and some might say controversially) taken the step of questioning the validity of the 2014 will. Few details are available but this is likely to be on the basis that the second will was handwritten

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
The threat of section 21 ‘no fault’ eviction was banished this week, after the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 passed into law
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
back-to-top-scroll