Channon & Anor v Perkins (A Firm)

Channon & Anor v Perkins (A Firm)

The evidence of the attesting witnesses, who could not recall witnessing the Will and whose signatures appeared on the Will, was not the strongest evidence required to rebut the presumption of due execution. The Will was regular on its face, and there was no evidence of fraud or motive to avoid compliance with section 9. The appeal was allowed and the Will was admitted to probate.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Michael James Channon; Claimant/respondent: Julia Alexis Channon; Defendant/appellant: Perkins (a firm); Defendant/appellant: Pamela Patricia Day (nee Ogden); Defendant/appellant: The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Probate/will Dispute / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Will admitted to probate
Legal Topics
Due Execution of Wills, Attestation Requirements, Presumption of Due Execution, Section 9 Wills Act 1837
Succession Law Probate Due Execution of Wills Attestation Requirements Presumption of Due Execution Section 9 Wills Act 1837

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael James Channon

Claimant/respondent

Julia Alexis Channon

Claimant/respondent

Perkins (a firm)

Defendant/appellant

Pamela Patricia Day (nee Ogden)

Defendant/appellant

The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Probate/will Dispute / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Will of Professor Derek French Channon dated 9 April 1996 was validly executed in accordance with section 9 of the Wills Act 1837
  2. 2 Whether the presumption of due execution was rebutted by the evidence of the attesting witnesses

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of the attesting witnesses, who could not recall witnessing the Will and whose signatures appeared on the Will, was not the strongest evidence required to rebut the presumption of due execution. The Will was regular on its face, and there was no evidence of fraud or motive to avoid compliance with section 9. The appeal was allowed and the Will was admitted to probate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Will admitted to probate

Orders

  • The Will of Professor Derek French Channon dated 9 April 1996 is pronounced for in solemn form of law.
  • Grant of letters of administration with the Will annexed to Mrs Day.