header-logo header-logo

26 March 2020 / James McKean , Andrew Bishop
Issue: 7880 / Categories: Features , Family , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

The predatory marriage trap

18317
James McKean, Andrew Bishop & Hollie Richardson highlight the morality & dangers of predatory marriage & probate
  • Individuals without mental capacity can be ensnared in predatory marriages, in this jurisdiction and abroad.
  • Following an unfortunate change to the law in 1971, these marriages are voidable, not void, and cannot be challenged after death. They allow spouses to take the benefit of the intestacy rules. Beneficiaries under any previous wills are disinherited, and largely without recourse.
  • Practitioners should be alert to the testamentary effects of marriage and consider capacity to marry just as they consider capacity to make a will.

The concept of ‘predatory marriage’ may not mean a great deal to English lawyers, and certainly not probate practitioners. But it is a phenomenon which can have serious and permanent testamentary effects.

Take an individual (henceforth ‘A’), whose mental capacity is in doubt. If A marries, the effect of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s 12(c), is that the marriage will not be void, but rather voidable—as in contract

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll