Hendry v Hendry & Ors

Hendry v Hendry & Ors

Permission to bring the claim out of time was refused because Rosita failed to provide a sufficient explanation for the delay, did not act promptly, and did not facilitate meaningful negotiations within the time limit. The court found that while she had an arguable case, it was not strong, and she had alternative remedies against her solicitors for professional negligence. The substantive time limit in the Act was not satisfied on the evidence presented.

Parties
Claimant: Rosita Hendry; First Defendant: Michael Hendry; Second Defendant: Dorothy Pertiwi; Third Defendant (executor): Irwin Mitchell Trustees Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Probate/inheritance (family Provision) / Application for Permission to Bring Claim Out of Time Under Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
Outcome
Permission to bring claim out of time refused
Legal Topics
Out of Time Applications, Reasonable Financial Provision, Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, Effect of Prenuptial Agreements, Professional Negligence
Succession Law Family Law Civil Procedure Out of Time Applications Reasonable Financial Provision Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 Effect of Prenuptial Agreements Professional Negligence

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rosita Hendry

Claimant

Michael Hendry

First Defendant

Dorothy Pertiwi

Second Defendant

Irwin Mitchell Trustees Limited

Third Defendant (executor)

Procedural Posture

Probate/inheritance (family Provision) / Application for Permission to Bring Claim Out of Time Under Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should be granted permission to bring a claim out of time under section 4 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
  2. 2 Whether the claimant acted promptly and provided sufficient explanation for delay
  3. 3 Whether negotiations were commenced within the time limit

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to bring the claim out of time was refused because Rosita failed to provide a sufficient explanation for the delay, did not act promptly, and did not facilitate meaningful negotiations within the time limit. The court found that while she had an arguable case, it was not strong, and she had alternative remedies against her solicitors for professional negligence. The substantive time limit in the Act was not satisfied on the evidence presented.

Court Disposition

Permission to bring claim out of time refused

Orders

  • Application for permission under section 4 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 dismissed