header-logo header-logo

Will they or won’t they?

20 May 2016 / Henrietta Mason , Paola Fudakowska
Issue: 7699 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , CPR
printer mail-detail

Paola Fudakowska & Henrietta Mason provide a wills & probate update

In Breslin v Bromley [2015] EWHC 3760 (Ch) the claimant (C) was the executor and beneficiary of his aunt’s will. He took his aunt to have her will prepared by a solicitor. The aunt did not execute the will before that solicitor but did so elsewhere, in circumstances which led to the second defendant (D2) requiring the will be proved in solemn form by cross examining the witnesses who attested, and leading to an allegation of undue influence by the third defendant (D3) (which claim was later abandoned). However, C was successful in his claim that the will was valid. Therefore the court had to determine the appropriate costs order.

The normal rule was that costs follow the event and C had succeeded in his claim. In probate proceedings an order for costs could be made out of the estate where the testator, or a principal beneficiary, was “really the cause of the litigation”. The court could also leave the parties to pay

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll