“Inheritance Row after 92 year old woman rips up Will on deathbed, invoking Victorian law”
As reported in the Daily Telegraph, Mrs Carry Keats ripped three-quarters of the way through her Will, made in 2020, when she was ill in hospital shortly before she died. Her Will made no provision for her sister, Josephine Oakley, but rather it left her £800k estate to be distributed to five of her cousins.
In 2022, having recently become closer to her sister Josephine, Mrs Keats called her solicitor, Ms Webb, to the hospital. Mrs Keats discussed her desire to no longer benefit her cousins under the Will and that she would now like her sister to benefit. Ms Webb confirmed to Mrs. Keats that if she tore up the Will to revoke it, then she would die intestate and Josephine would inherit under the Rules of Intestacy.
Mrs Keats managed to rip through three-quarters of the Will before asking Ms Webb to complete the task for her. Under the Wills Act 1837 for the destruction of the Will to be valid Mrs Keats had to either intentionally fully destroy the Will herself or properly authorise her solicitor, Ms Webb, to do so on her behalf.
The Question Before The Court & The Decision
Did Mrs Keats have the necessary mental capacity (‘testamentary capacity') and therefore the requisite intention to destroy the Will herself or through directing Ms Webb to destroy the Will on her behalf?
The lawyer acting for the cousins argued that Mrs Keats lacked the necessary testamentary capacity, and that the existing 2020 Will benefiting the cousins, remained valid despite the attempt by Mrs Keats to revoke it.
At the trial, Ms Webb gave evidence that despite being medicated and in some pain Mrs Keats fully understood the implications of her Will being destroyed, that dying intestate would result in her sister, Josephine, inheriting and that her cousins would no longer inherit.
The Court ruled that Mrs Keats did have the intention to revoke her Will. Deputy Master John Linwood ruling:
“In my Judgment there was actual tearing combined with intent. Carry did sufficiently destroy the Will as it was entirely torn in half as she intended”.
As such the sister, Josephine, inherited under the Rule of Intestacy.
It should be noted that the fact that a solicitor oversaw the entire process, provided advice at the time the Will was destroyed and had a detailed recollection of the event definitely assisted Josephine in defeating the claim made by Mrs Keats' cousins.
Are There Lessons To Be Learned?
Expensive legal action has proved necessary to resolve this particular matter and a great deal of stress has, no doubt, been caused to all parties.
Clearly, where someone wishes to change their Will very shortly before they die, matters can prove controversial. Wherever possible, a new Will should be put in place however, this isn’t always practical.
Where there is no urgency, there can sometimes be the temptation for some people to destroy their Will when they have decided they no longer wish the Will to apply. However, not everyone has a clear understanding of the Rules of Intestacy and who would benefit under these rules in the absence of a Will.
I personally have received phone calls from clients asking for their Wills to be destroyed. However, once the matter has been discussed it has been become apparent that some clients have misunderstood who would benefit under the Rules of Intestacy.
The strong advice is that a new Will should be put in place to revoke the old Will. Putting in place a new Will, prepared by a professional, helps demonstrate that the testator has testamentary capacity and has made an informed decision to benefit chosen beneficiaries under the new Will at the expense of the beneficiaries under the old (revoked) Will.
Next Steps...
If you have any questions regarding the contents of this blog or if you are unsure whether you should make a new Will, please contact me on 01283 561531 or at m.kelly@timms-law.com
