Trusts and Inheritance: Recent Developments was the chair of the Chancery Bar Association. She lectures and publishes widely on all areas of her expertise. Mark Baxter

#5sblaw

TrustsandInheritance:RecentDevelopments

28November2017

at

TheRoyalSocietyofArts

8JohnAdamStreet

LondonWC2N6EZ

www.5sblaw.com

2.5hours

http://www.5sblaw.com

8.30am Registrationandbreakfast

9.10am Introduction–PenelopeReedQC

9.20am TrustDisclosureandDataProtection

MarkBaxter

9.50am Retrospectiveremediesfortaxproblems:rectification,constructionandmistake-wherearewenow?

HenryLeggeQC

10.20am Refreshments

10.50am Avoiding probate disputes using statutory wills and aninheritancecaseupdate

WilliamEast

11.20am TheLawCommissionWillsConsultation

BarbaraRich

11.50am PaneldiscussionandQ&A

12.30pm Close

PenelopeReedQChasawideChancerypracticewithspecialemphasison trusts,wills, contentious probate, family provision claims and tax, both in the UK andoverseas.SheactedforthesuccessfulcharitiesintheirappealtotheSupremeCourtin Ilott v Mitson [2017] UKSC 17. Penelope is recommended by all the leadingdirectories, isdescribedas “faultless.Heradvice isdelivered succinctlyandwithouthesitation, inspiring the greatest of confidence in both her instructing solicitors andherclients.”Sheispraisedforhermasteryofcontentiousprobate,trustsandcapitaltaxmatters. She is an accreditedmediator, amemberof STEP,ACTAPSanduntilrecentlywasthechairoftheChanceryBarAssociation.Shelecturesandpublisheswidelyonallareasofherexpertise.

Mark Baxter has a broad traditional chancery practice including a particular focus oncontentiousandnon-contentioustrustsandprobate,tax,andCourtofProtectionwork,andrelatedprofessionalnegligence.HeisrecommendedintwoareasofpracticeinChambersUK2017,describedas“technicallysuperb,isverygoodwithclients,andisaverypersuasiveadvocatewhoprovidesa tremendous service”. Mark regularly lecturesandcontributes toprofessionaljournalsonallareasofhispracticeandisco-author(withPenelopeReed)ofRiskandNegligence inWills,Estates, andTrusts.Mark recentlyappearedat first instanceandonappealinRandallvRandall[2014]EWHC3134(Ch),[2016]EWCACiv494,whichisthe leadingcaseonstandingtobringacontentiousprobateclaim,aswellas inRobertsvFresco [2017] EWHC 283 (Ch), where he successfully resisted an attempt to bring anInheritanceActclaimbyadeceasedclaimant’sestate.

HenryLeggeQC’s practice includesabroad rangeof chanceryworkbutwithparticularemphasis on cases involving trusts, estates, pension schemes and disputes relating topersonalchattelsandart.Throughouthiscareerhehasactedregularlyintrust,estatesandprobate cases. Notable recent cases include theLongleat litigation, theTrilogy litigationandGorbunova v Berezovsky. “One of the brightest stars of the chancery Bar. A brilliantadvocatewithgreattechnicalnous.Fantasticallybright.”ChambersHNW2016

WilliamEasthasageneral chancerypractice inall areasofworkundertakenat5StoneBuildings. For ninemonths after completing pupillage hewas a judicial assistant in theSupreme Court to LordsWalker and Dyson. Hemakes regular appearances in the HighCourt, County Court and the Court of Protection and is listed for the latter as a leadingjunior inChambersUK2017.In the2016directoryhewaspraised for“his financial andinvestmentexpertisealongsidehisfamilyestateplanningexperience.”HeisamemberoftheBarProBonoUnitandalsoparticipatesintheCLIPSschemeintheHighCourtgivingfreerepresentation to litigants inperson in theChanceryDivisionApplicationsCourt.Hehaswritten for several professional publications and frequently lectures on areas of hispractice.

Barbara Rich specialises in contentious succession and trusts litigation, and in thepropertyandaffairs jurisdictionoftheCourtofProtectionundertheMentalCapacityAct

2005.Thecasesshedealswithareoftenofsubstantialvalueand/orlegalcomplexityandimportance. Barbara is also an enthusiastic, effective and experiencedmediator. She isrecommendedintheLegal5002018directoryasatier2leadingjuniorforPrivateClient:trustsandprobatework:‘Herstaminaishugeandherbrainpowersecondtonone’,andasatier1leadingjuniorforCourtofProtectionwork,andinChambersUKBarGuide2018asaleading junior intraditionalChancerywork: "Handlesclientsextraordinarilywell.Shealsohasagoodacademicgraspofthelawwhilstatthesametimebeingastronglitigatorwhocanidentify and make practical arguments"and as a star individual in Court of Protectionpropertyandaffairswork.

These notes are intended as an aid to stimulate debate: delegatesmust takeexpertadvicebeforetakingorrefrainingfromanyactiononthebasisof thesenotesandthespeakercanacceptnoresponsibilityorliabilityforanyactionoromission taken by delegates based on the information in these notes or thelectures.

TrustDisclosureand

DataProtection

MarkBaxter

TrustandInheritance: RecentDevelopments

TrustDisclosureandDataProtection MarkBaxter

1

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



2

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



3

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



4

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



5

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



6

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



7

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



8

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



9

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



10

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



11

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



12

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



13

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

[email protected]

©MarkBaxter2017

mailto:[email protected]

RetrospectiveRemedies

fortaxproblems:

Rectification,

constructionandmistake

–wherearewenow?

HenryLeggeQC


Retrospectiveremedies HenryLeggeQC 14

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

[email protected]

©HenryLeggeQC2017

mailto:[email protected]

AvoidingProbate

DisputesusingStatutory

WillsandanInheritance

CaseUpdate

WilliamEast


Avoidingprobatedisputes WilliamEast 24

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

[email protected]

©WilliamEast2017

AWillsAct2020?

BarbaraRich


AWillsAct2020? BarbaraRich 38

AWILLSACT2020?

INTRODUCTION

In July2017theLawCommissionpublished itsconsultationpaperon“MakingA

Will”.Thisisawide-ranginggeneralreviewofthelawofmakingandinterpreting

wills, bothwillsmadeby adultswhohave capacity todo so for themselves, and

statutory wills authorised by the Court of Protection for adults who lack

testamentarycapacity.TheLawCommission’sstatedreasonforundertakingthis

reviewisthat:

The lawofwills needs to bemodernised to takeaccount of the changes in society,

technologyandmedicalunderstandingthathavetakenplacesincetheVictorianera.

Theconsultationclosedon10November2017.TheLawCommissionhasreported

thatithasreceived177responses.Someoftherepresentativeprofessionalbodies

havepublishedtheirresponses.TheLawCommissioniscurrentlyanalysingthese

responsesandwillproduceafurtherreportonceithasdoneso.Thetargetdate

forthisislate2018.

Is itpossible that therewillbeaWillsAct2020,bringingsomeof thesechanges

intoforce?TheLawCommissionsay(paragraph1.25)that

We do see one result of this project as being the creation of a moremodern and

improvedWillsAct,toreplacetheWillsAct1837

Ifso,theywillmakeagreatdifferencetoalllawyerswhodealwithwills,whether

their focus is on non-contentious advice and will-drafting, or on the disputed

validityorinterpretationofwills.Itisofgreatinteresttousat5StoneBuildings,



as the validity and interpretation of wills has traditionally been a core area of

practiceinchambers,andcontinuestobesotoday.Theconsultationpapersrefers

tomanydecidedcasesinwhichmembersofchambershaveacted,andtoachapter

writtenbyPenelopeReedQCinarecentbookonsuccessionlaw.

TheLawCommission’spaper is verywide-ranging. The chapter-headingsof the

consultationpaperalonegiveanideaofitsbreadth.Itcovers:

- testamentarycapacity

- statutorywills

- supportedwill-making

- formalities

- electronicwills

- protecting vulnerable testators: knowledge and approval and undue

influence

- childrenmakingwills

- interpretationandrectification

- ademption

- revocation

- mutualwills



- donationesmortiscausa(deathbedgifts)

- “otherthingsawillcoulddo”

Thepaperraises64questionsforconsultation.Theveryfirstquestioniswhether

theword “testator” shouldbe replacedbyanother term–either “will-maker”or

something else. It’s not easy to think of a single clear English word to replace

“testator”–oneaspectofclaritybeingtoavoidanyconfusionbetweentheperson

whosewill it is,and theperson“making” it in thesenseofdrafting it,which isa

problemwith“will-maker”.

TheLawCommissionteamexplainedatoneoftheworkshopsIattendedthatthey

haveadoptedthreeguidingprinciples(paragraph1.30):

- Tosupporttheexerciseoftestamentaryfreedom

- To protect testators in a way which responds to the needs of an ageing

populationwhichisatriskoffinancialfraud

- To ensure that the law is clear and certain, not only for lawyers

professionallyengagedwithitdayinanddayout,butforpeoplewhoonly

occasionallycomeintocontactwithit.

AstheLawCommissionrecognise,theseprinciplescanpullindifferentdirections,

and there is work to be done in trying to find an appropriate balance between

them.

It would be impossible in a short talk to do justice to all these topics and

consultation questions. Instead, I am going to highlight some which are of



particular interest and to which the published response promises some further

debate.



TESTAMENTARYCAPACITYANDSTATUTORYWILLS

Since theMentalCapacityAct2005(“theMCA”)came into force tenyearsago,a

substantialdebatehasdevelopedastowhethertheMCAtestofcapacitytomakea

decisionhas superseded, or should supersede, thewell-knowncommon law test

forwillsinBanksv.Goodfellow(1870)LR5QB549:



“It isessential…thatatestatorshallunderstandthenatureoftheactandits effects; shall understand the extent of the property of which he isdisposing;shallbeabletocomprehendandappreciatetheclaimstowhichheoughttogiveeffect;and,withaviewtothelatterobject,thatnodisorderofthemindshallpoisonhisaffections,perverthissenseofright,orpreventtheexerciseofhisnaturalfaculties–thatnoinsanedelusionshallinfluencehiswillindisposingofhispropertyandbringaboutadisposalofitwhich,ifthemindhadbeensound,wouldnothavebeenmade”

ThelastjudicialwordonthisdebatewasWalkerv.Badmin[2014]EWHC71(Ch),

and in the Court of Appeal, in Simon b. Byford [2014] EWCA Civ 280 (although

obiter as the will in that case was made before the MCA came into force). In

Walker the deputy High Court judge, Nicholas Strauss QC, said that his first

impression on considering the issue was that the statutory test superseded the

common law, but hewas persuaded that thiswaswrong, and that the statutory

testwasnotintendedtoaffectaretrospectivedecisionbyacourtastowhethera

testatorhadcapacitytomakehisownwill.Healsosaidthatevenifthestatutory

test had applied, the result would have been the same, and inevitably this will

oftenbe thecase. He identified threedifferencesbetweenthestatutory testand

thecommonlawtestofcapacity:

(1) Burdenofproof.ThestatutorypresumptionofcapacityappliestoallMCA

decisions,butthecommonlawburdenofproofinadisputedtestamentary

capacitycasestartswith theperson(s)propoundingthewillandcanshift

forensicallyasthecasedevelops.

(2) Thereisnoprecisecommonlawequivalenttotheimportantelementofthe

statutory test which is that a person must be able to “understand the

informationrelevanttothedecision”.Inthecommonlawtest,thequestion

iswhetherornot the testatorunderstands theextentofhispropertyand

theclaimstowhichheoughttogiveeffect.



(3) Thestatutorytesthasanextendeddefinitionof“informationrelevanttoa

decision” which includes information about the reasonably foreseeable

consequencesof(a)decidingonewayoranother,or(b)failingtomakethe

decision. There is no equivalent to this in the common law test: for

example, the common law test does not explicitly require capacity to

understand that failing tomakeawill results in intestacyor in an earlier

willbeingadmitted toprobate. But this is surely implicit in thewordsof

thecommonlawtest“thatatestatorshallunderstandthenatureoftheact

anditseffects”?

(4) A further problem, identified by Penelope Reed QC is the divergence

between the common law test and the statutory test in circumstances

where there has been a significant passage of time between giving

instructions for thewill and executing it. Under the common law rule in

Parker v. Felgate, more recently re-affirmed in Perrins v. Holland, the

testator does not require full testamentary capacity at the later date,

providing he is capable of understanding that he is executing thewill for

whichhepreviouslygaveinstructions. Thisisdifferentfromthedecision-

specific,time-specificapproachoftheMCA.

TheLawCommission’sanalysisleadstothefollowingquestionsandproposals:

Firstly,aproposaltoadoptthestatutorytestinplaceofthecommonlawtest:



Secondly, if that proposal is not adopted,whether the current common law test

shouldbeputonastatutoryfooting:

And thirdly, whether the statutory version of Banks v. Goodfellow should be

modernisedandrefinedincertainways.



And finally, if a reformed version of Banks v. Goodfellow is put on a statutory

footing,whether it should includeastatutorypresumptionofcapacity. TheLaw

Commissionproposethatitshould.

Assessmentofcapacityandthe“goldenrule”

Asectionoftheconsultationpaperdealswithrationalisationofthe“goldenrule”

i.e. when should a lawyer ensure that there is an assessment of a testator’s

capacity, and who should carry out and record that assessment. The Law

Commission’sconclusionisthatthereshouldnotbeaformalcertificationscheme

forassessors,butthatthereshouldbeanon-statutorycodeofpracticetoprovide

guidanceonwhen,bywhomandhowatestator’scapacityshouldbeassessed.At

the workshops which I attended (one in conjunction with STEP and one in

conjunctionwith the ChanceryBarAssociation) therewas general opposition to

theideaofacodeofpractice,althoughthepublishedresponseoftheLawSociety

welcomesthisproposal. Peoplewereconcernedthatitcouldbecomeapotential

sourceof litigation in itsownright,andthat itwaswrongforthegovernmentto

seektoenactandregulatestandardsinprofessionswhichareotherwiseregulated.

Therewas also opposition to the idea of accreditation or certification for third-

partyassessors.

Asregardsstatutorywills, theconsultationsummarises thedebateoverwhether

the statutorybest interests test is the rightapproach tomakinga statutorywill:

oneacademiccommentator(ProfessorRosieHardingofBirminghamLawSchool)

hasarguedthat

“statutory wills may sometimes operate on the basis of a pragmatic

distribution of assets; that is as a result of argument and compromise

betweenthecompetingmembersofthetestator’sfamily,ratherthanbeing



determined by the testator’s best interests. It may be, however, that a

pragmaticdistribution,whichavoidsanycostsassociatedwithpost-death

litigation, is in the testator’s best interests in the sense that it is unlikely

thatthetestatorwouldwishhisorherestatetobedepletedbythecostsof

suchlitigation,ifitcanbeavoided.”

TheLawCommissionconcludethatreformisnotrequiredofanyof

(1) Thebestintereststest

(2) The way in which the discretion is currently exercised by the Court of

Protection,or

(3) Torestrictthecircumstancesinwhichastatutorywillcanbemade



FORMALITIESAND“ELECTRONICWILLS”

The consultation paper reviews the formalities for making a will in detail and

seeks consultees’ views onwhether the current rules deter people frommaking

wills.Itproposesremovingthereferenceto“attestation”ofwitnesses’signatures

ins9(d)(i)oftheWillsAct1837.Themostsignificantproposalthatismadeinthe

consultationisfortheintroductionofa“dispensingpower”torecogniseawillas

valideventhoughformalitieshavenotbeencompliedwith.

Formalities can serve a number of functions (see paragraph 5.6 of the

consultation):

• Asevidencethatthewillwasmadebythepersonwhosenameitbears,ata

timewhens/heisnolongeralivetoauthenticateit

• Toensurethat thepersonmakingthewillunderstandstheseriousnessof

whats/heisdoingandthinkscarefullyaboutwhats/hewishestoachieve,

and to avoid accidentally creating a legally bindingdocumentwhichdoes

notinfactcontainhisorherthought-throughfinalwishes

• Tostandardiseawell-understoodmeansoftransferringpropertyondeath

• Toprotectthepersonmakingthewillfromfraudorundueinfluence”“the

firstlineofdefenceagainstfrauduponthedead”astheyweredescribedin

onemid-20Ccase.

If therewereno formalityrules, therewouldbearisk thatwillswhichwerenot

the true last wishes of the people who made them would be admitted to

probate. But the existence of formality rules also prevents some genuine

expressionsof lastwishes frombeing admitted toprobate, so there is adifficult



question of balance in creating a formality rule, and any exception(s) to it. The

current law in England and Wales requires formalities, but also relies on a

presumption of due execution, even for a will which is informal and does not

containastandardclause(anattestationclause)datingthewillandstatingthatit

has been signed by the personmaking it in the presence of twowitnesseswho

have themselves signed as witnesses in the presence of the person making the

will.ThismeansthatanychallengetothevalidityofanEnglishwillbasedonnon-

compliance with formalities must positively prove non-compliance if it is to

succeed.

TheLawCommission’s consultationalso reviews the “dispensingpowers”which

exist inallAustralian states,NewZealandandanumberof statesandprovinces

within the USA, Canada and South Africa. The Law Commission’s consultation

paper discusses intention-based dispensing powers and provisionally proposes

introducingsuchapowerinEnglandandWales. Itasksconsulteeswhetherthey

agreewiththisproposal:



Theconsultationpaperalsoconsiders“electronicwills”,inotherwords,validand

executed wills which are created and exist other than on paper. No major

jurisdictionasyethasasuccessfullegislativeschemeforsuchwills,andelectronic

willshaveneverbeenrecognisedasvalid inEnglandandWales. It isundecided

whether a completely electronicwill could be accepted both as “writing” and as

“signed” for the purposes of the Wills Act 1837. The Law Commission

provisionallyproposesthat

(1) An enabling power should be introduced that will allow electronically

executed wills or fully electronic wills to be recognised as valid, to be

enactedthroughsecondarylegislation



(2) The enabling power should be neutral as to the form that electronically

executedorfullyelectronicwillsshouldtake,allowingthistobedecidedat

thetimeoftheenactmentofthesecondarylegislation,and

(3) Suchanenablingpowershouldbeexercisedwhenaformofelectronically

executedwillorfullyelectronicwill,asthecasemaybe,isavailablewhich

provides sufficient protection for testators against the risks of fraud and

undueinfluence.

TheLawSociety’sresponsetothisisthatitis“notopposedtothepossibilitythat

willsmay,atsomepoint,bemadeelectronically”butgoesontosay

“However,weurgecautionagainstproposalstousherinfullydigitalprocessesfor

makingwillsatthispointintime.Withoutaccesstoadetailedproposalofhowa

digitalisedsystemmightoperateinpracticeandguidancetoaccompanysuch,itis

difficulttopicturehowthiscouldbeimplemented.Westronglyrecommendthat,

should the infrastructure for electronicwills become available, a comprehensive

consultationexerciseshouldbecarriedouttoassesstheneedforsuch,aswellas

therisksandbenefitsitpresents.”



ADISPENSINGPOWER&ELECTRONICWILLSINPRACTICE

Duringtheconsultationperiod,thefollowingheadlineappearedontheBBCnews

website.

“Unsenttextacceptedasdeadman’swillbyAustraliancourt”

On 11 October 2017, this headline appeared on the BBC news website.The

storynaturallyarousedalotofinterestanddiscussion.TheBBCnewsstory,which

appeared in the “Technology” sectionof itswebsite rather thanas a storyabout

the law, does not link to the text of the judgment of the Supreme Court of

Queensland, published on 9 October 2017, but this is publicly available on

theAUSTLIIwebsite,andreportedasReNichol;NicholvNichol[2017]QSC220.

InitsoriginalversiontheBBCnewsstoryalsomadenoreferencetothefactthat

thecourtinQueensland–theAustralianstatewherethecasewasdecided–was

applyingalawwhichallowedittodispensewithformalityinmakingavalidwill,

orthatthereisalivepossibilityofasimilarlawcomingintoforceinEnglandand

Wales.ThisisoneofthemostimportantaspectsofthestoryforanEnglishreader.

The decision gives a practical example and context for considering the Law

Commission’s proposals in relation both to dispensing with formalities and to

validatingelectronicwills.

Thehistoryoftheunsenttext

Assooften,thestorybehindthecaseisaverysadone.MarkNichol,amanof54

wholivedinasuburbofBrisbane,killedhimselfinashedathishomeinOctober

2016, having apparently made a previous suicide attempt in June 2016. On 10

October 2016, his wife Julie found his mobile phone alongside his body, on a

workbenchintheshed.Thefollowingday,11October,Julieaskedafriendofhers,

AliciaMcDonald,toaccessthemobilephonetolookthroughthecontactlisttosee

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-41580970

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-41580970

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QSC/2017/220.html



whoshouldbenotifiedofMark’sdeath.AliciatoldJulieshehadfoundanunsent

textmessage,andoneofMark’snephewstookascreenshotofit.Itread:

DaveNicyouand Jackkeepall that Ihavehouseandsuperannuation,

putmyashesinthebackgardenwithTrishJuliewilltakeherstuffonly

she’sokgonebacktoherexAGAINI’mbeaten.AbitofcashbehindTV

andabitinthebankCashcardpin3636

MRN190162Q

10/10/2016

Mywill

ThejudgmentrecordsthattheabbreviationMRN190162QmatchedMarkNichol’s

initials and date of birth, 19 January 1962. The Q isn’t explained, but perhaps

standsforQueensland,thestateinwhichhelived.Therewasapaperclipsymbol

(indicatinganattachedimage)ontheleftofthewords“mywill”andasmileyface

oftheotherside.

Therewasnodispute that the textmessagewasaddressed toDavidNichol,who

wasMark’sbrother,andwhosecontactdetailswerestoredinthephone’smemory

under thename“DaveNic”. MarkNichol’s formerwifePatricia(presumably the

“Trish” referred to in the text),wasdead.Markhadremarried,havingbeen ina

relationshipwithhiswifeJulieforaboutthreeandahalfyears,andmarriedfora

year.Markalsohadanadultson,Anthony,whoisnotmentionedinthetext.The

judgesaidthatitwas



uncontroversial thattherelationship[with Julie]hadproblemsandthat[Julie]had

leftthedeceasedonatleastthreeoccasions,thefinaltimebeingsometwodaysprior

tohisdeath. It shouldbesaid,notwithstandingthat [Julie]hadmovedout, shestill

madearrangementstotakethedeceasedtohismentalhealthappointmentsandthat

theyspenttheweekendpriortohisdeathtogether.

Markhadnevermadeawillbefore,althoughhehadtalkedbothtoJulieandtohis

motherondifferentoccasionsabouthavingmadeone.Davidalsogaveevidence

aboutconversationshehadhadwithMark,inwhichMarkhadsaidthathewanted

all his possessions, including his house and his superannuation fund, to go to

David.

The phone was forensically examined and the examiner confirmed that the

messagehadnot been sent, and that itwas likely tohavebeen savedunsentby

someonepressingthebackarrowonthemessageeditingscreen.Thedateof its

creation couldnotbepinpointedbeyond confirming that itwas createdat some

timepriortothepointwhenAliciahadaccessediton11October2016.

Julie did not think that the textmessage should be regarded as a validwill, and

applied to court for letters of administration on intestacy, underwhich she and

Mark’ssonAnthonywouldhavebeenentitledtoMark’sestate.Shewassupported

byAnthony.DavidNichol,andhissonJackcontestedthisapplication,andinstead

askedthecourttomakeadeclarationunderQueenslandlawthatthetextmessage

wasawill,eventhoughithadnotbeenexecutedasawill inaccordancewiththe

usual legal formalities. Theywere supportedbyMark’smother, andbyanother

brother,BradleyNichol.

JuliearguedthatthefactthatthetextwasunsentshowedthatMarkhadnotmade

uphismindthatitwastobehiswill.DavidandJack’sresponsetothatwasthat



thefactthetextmessagewasnotsentdoesnotindicatethatthetextmessage

wasnotintendedtohaveeffect.[DavidandJackargue]thatthelikelyintent

ofthedeceasedwasthatthetextmessagebefoundafterhehadkilledhimself.

Ifhehadsentthatmessagebeforehetookhis lifethenDavidNicholorJack

Nichol would have invariably attempted to take steps to try to stop the

deceased.

InareportofthecaseintheDailyMail,Mark’ssonAnthonyisquotedassaying:

Ifyouknewmyfather,thatwasn’thislastwillandtestament–thatwashim

beingsarcastic

Theywerenothiswishes,theyweremoresarcasm.

But the judgment records that Anthony did not give evidence, and that other

witnesses gave evidence of a difficult relationship and limited contact between

Mark and Anthony. The judge also commented that there was “obvious

antagonism”betweenJulieontheonehandandDavidandJackontheother,and

that a lot of the written evidence was “unnecessarily inflammatory and

unhelpful”.Noneofthewitnesseswerecross-examinedontheirevidence.

TheQueenslandlawondispensingwithformalities

Section10oftheSuccessionAct1981inQueenslandsetsouthowawillmustbe

executed.Itsays

(2)Awillmustbe—

(a) inwriting;and



(b) signedby—

(i) thetestator;or

(ii) someone else, in thepresenceof and at thedirectionof the

testator.

(3) The signature must be made or acknowledged by the testator in the

presenceof2ormorewitnessespresentatthesametime.

(4) Atleast2ofthewitnessesmustattestandsignthewillinthepresenceof

thetestator,butnotnecessarilyinthepresenceofeachother.

(5) However, none of thewitnesses need to know that the document attested

andsignedisawill.

(6) Thesignaturesneednotbeatthefootofthewill.

(7) Thesignatureofthetestatormustbemadewiththeintentionofexecuting

thewill.

These formalities are very similar thosewhich apply inEngland. But the law in

Queenslandcontainsapower–whichEnglishlawdoesnot–todispensewiththe

formalexecutionrequirementsofawill.Section18oftheQueenslandSuccession

Act1981providesasfollows:

18 Courtmay dispensewith execution requirements forwill, alteration or

revocation

(1)Thissectionappliestoadocument,orapartofadocument,that—



(a)purportstostatethetestamentaryintentionsofadeceasedperson;and

(b)hasnotbeenexecutedunderthispart.

(2)Thedocumentorthepartformsawill,analterationofawill,orafullorpartial

revocationofawill,ofthedeceasedpersonifthecourtissatisfiedthattheperson

intended the document or part to form the person’s will, an alteration to the

person’swillorafullorpartialrevocationoftheperson’swill.

(3) Inmaking a decisionunder subsection (2), the courtmay, in addition to the

documentorpart,haveregardto—

(a)anyevidencerelatingtothewayinwhichthedocumentorpartwasexecuted;

and

(b) any evidence of the person’s testamentary intentions, including evidence of

statementsmadebytheperson.

(4)Subsection(3)doesnotlimitthemattersacourtmayhaveregardtoinmaking

adecisionundersubsection(2).

The heart of this provision is in the words of s18(2). It requires a judge to be

satisfiedthattheperson“intendedthedocument…toformtheperson’swill”.This

intention-based approach is a 2006 revision of the law as originally enacted in

1981, and which looked to the question of whether or not there had been

substantialcompliancewithstrictformalityrules.



Anintention-basedapproachmeansthatthejudgemustforminferencesfromall

oftheevidenceincludingevidenceofthetypedescribedins18(3).Unsurprisingly,

inoneoftheearliercasesquotedbythejudgeinNichol,thejudgehadsaid

Greatcareistobetakenintheevaluationoftherelevantevidence.

ThejudgewentontorefertosomeotherpreviousdecisionsinQueenslandandset

outwhatshedescribedasthethreeconditionsfors18tooperate:

• Wasthereadocument?

• Did that document purport to embody the testamentary intentions of the

relevantdeceasedperson?

• Didtheevidencesatisfy thecourt thateither,at the timeof thedocument

being brought into being, or, at some later time, the relevant deceased

person, by some act orwords, demonstrated that itwas her, or his, then

intention that the document should, without more on her, or his, part

operateasher,orhis,Will?

Another evidential hurdle for anyone seeking to prove an informal will in

Queensland is that thecourtdoesnotpresumethat thepersonwhomade ithad

thementalcapacitytomakeawill,sothismustbeprovedbythepersonputting

forwardthewillasvalid.

ThedecisionofBrownJthatthemessagewasavalidwill

The judgewassatisfied that the textmessagewasanelectronicdocumentwhich

satisfiedthedefinitionofadocumentfors18,andthatitpurportedtostateMark’s

testamentaryintentionsi.e.hiswishesorintentionsinrelationtohispropertyon

his death. The text said that itwas “mywill” and it identified all the significant



assetsthatMarkhad,andwherehewantedhisashesplaced.Manylawyerswho

specialise in this field will have seen home-made wills which are less

comprehensiveandlessclearthanthis.Thejudgesaidthatthe“informalnature”

of the text did not prevent it from being sufficient to represent testamentary

intentions,referringtoanearliercasewhereatestatorhadwritten“mywill”ona

DVDinwhichhehadrecordedhisintentions.Themostdifficultissueforthejudge

todecidewaswhetherMarkintendedtheunsenttexttooperateashiswill.She

wassatisfiedthathewasabletofunctionandthinknormally,despitetheprevious

suicide attempt and the fact that he was receiving counselling, and that he had

capacity to make a will. She was also satisfied that Mark “appreciated the

significanceofwhathewasdoingbycreatingthetextmessage”,andincludingthe

words“mywill”.Sheidentifiedthecircumstanceswhichsatisfiedherthathedid

intendtheunsentmessagetobehiswill:

• The fact that it was created on or about the time that Mark wascontemplatingdeath,andincludedanindicationastowhatshouldbedonewithhisashes

• Thefactthatthephonewaswithhimintheshedwhenhedied

• ThefactthatthetextdealtwiththedispositionofMark’sassetsandmadeitclearhedidnotwishtoleaveJulieanything.Thejudgefoundthisexclusionwasexplicable,asat thetimeofMark’sdeathshehadmovedout,andtherelationshiphadbeenrelativelyshort.ThejudgealsofoundthatthelackofaconstantrelationshipwithAnthonyprovidedarationalexplanationastowhyhewasnotreferredtointhetextmessage.

• Thelevelofdetail inthemessage, includingthedirectionsaboutwheretofindcashandaccessthebankaccount,andthewords“mywill”



• ThefactthatMarkhadnotexpressedanycontrarywishesorintentionsinrelationtoisestatetothoseinthemessage

Shesaid

Thetermsofthetextmessagereflectthat[Mark]wishedthedocumenttobehisfinalwillandwasnotmerelyanemotionalexpressionofwishes...

Idonotconsiderthefactthatthemessagewassavedasadraftmessageandthathedidnotsendit,isevidencethathedidnotwishthetextmessagetobeoperativeashiswill.Rather,Ifindthathavingthemobilephonewithhimatthe place he took his life so it was found with him and not sending themessage,isconsistentwiththefactthathedidnotwanttoalerthisbrothertothefactthathewasabouttocommitsuicide,butdidintendthetextmessagetobediscoveredwhenhewasfound.

ShouldtherebeadispensingpowerinEnglandandWales?

MostoftheinstantreactionthatIhavereadtothedecisioninNicholhasbeen

hostiletotheideathatanunsenttextmessagecouldberegardedasavalid

will.CommentsonarticlesintheDailyMailarealimitedbarometerofpublic

opinion,buttheirgeneralviewissummedupinthese:

Thisisridiculous,ifhe’dwantedthatthenwhydidn’thesendthetext?Andas

argued,anyonecouldhavewrittenthat,whoeverfoundthephonecouldhave,

asitwasntsentwithadatestamppriortohisdeaththere’snowayof

knowing.Honestlydon’tunderstandwhyanyjudgewouldacceptthat.

and

Antipodeslaw??Whatastupidverdictfromstupidjudges.Thewholepointof

writtenwillsandwitnessesistostopclaimssuchasthese.



Lawyers’reactiontothenewsstoryhasbeenverysimilar–thisisrepresentative

ofothercommentsI’veread.

BemusingdecisionfromDownUnder.Allsortsofreasonswhythistext

remainedindraftform!Cannotbelievethisisundoubtedtruewishes!

Having carefully read both the judgment inNicholand the Law Commission’s

consultationpaperandproposal,andreflectedonthesecomments,Iaminfavour

of an intention-based dispensing law such as that proposed by the Law

Commission.Theexpressionoftestamentaryintentioninatextmessagereflectsa

reality of contemporary life for many people – a phone is the instrument of

communicationandrecordwhichisalwaysathand.Manyoftheformalitieswhich

wouldhavebeenstandardinbusinesslettersacoupleofdecadesago,letalonethe

formalities required by section 9 of theWills Act 1837, seem archaic, in an age

where the majority of business correspondence is conducted by email, and

monarchsandheadsofstateexpresstheirthoughtsonTwitter.It’sanironyofan

agewhichisimpatientwithorignorantofthetraditionalformalitiesofwills,thatit

is also constrained by a different type of formality imposed by information

technology: thepassword rage inducedbymistypinghalf-rememberednamesof

childhoodpets intoaboxonacomputerscreen,orhavinganemailbounceback

becauseofasingle-charactererrorintypingtheaddress.

Although treating an unsent text message as a valid will seems very surprising

withoutknowingthefactualcontext,thefullstoryexplainsthedecision.Iwonder

howmanyothercommentatorsmightreconsidertheirviewsinthelightofreading

thefull judgment?Inmostcircumstances,anunsenttextmessagewouldbeseen

as tentative rather than conclusive, and unless a phone is securely password-

protected(therewasnoevidenceaboutthisintheNicholcase,andIhaveassumed

thatitwasnotpassword-protected)itisobviouslyeasyforsomeoneelseeitherto



type their ownmessage, or, amoreobvious risk, todelete somethingwhichhas

previously been typed but not sent. But in circumstances where the phone is

found,ashere,inproximityinplaceandtimetoapersonwhohastakenhisown

life,andwheresuicidealsoprovidesanexplanationforleavingthemessageunsent

to its ultimate intended recipient, the conclusion of the judge becomes more

compelling. They are unusual circumstances, but not entirely extraordinary. I

think that,quitecontrary tobeinga “stupidverdict”, thedecisionwell illustrates

howajudicially-exercisedpowertodispensewithformalitieswheretheintention

tomakeawillisproved,couldbeavaluableadditiontothelawofwillsinEngland

andWales.Andifsuchachangeinthelawwasmade,atextmessagereading“All4

U”mightonedayqualifyastheshortestwilleverwritten.

Documents

Trusts and Inheritance: Recent Developments was the chair of the Chancery Bar Association. She lectures and publishes widely on all areas of her expertise. Mark Baxter