Goodman v Goodman & Ors [2006] EWHC 1757 (Ch) (14 July 2006)

Goodman v Goodman & Ors [2006] EWHC 1757 (Ch) (14 July 2006)

The evidence established on the balance of probabilities, with convincing evidence, that clause 3 was included in Guy Goodman's will due to a failure by the draftsman to understand instructions, and that Guy did not intend to confer a separate legacy of £2,000 per month to Geoffrey Goodman beyond the existing contractual arrangements. Rectification by excision of clause 3 is therefore ordered.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 1757 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Jennifer Goodman; First Defendant: Geoffrey Goodman; Second Defendant: Richard Clegg; Third Defendant: Simon Manuel
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Rectification Application Under S.20 Administration of Justice Act 1982 / Judgment After Hearing of Rectification Application
Outcome
Claim for rectification allowed
Legal Topics
Rectification of Wills, Testator's Intention, Clerical Error, Failure to Understand Instructions
Wills and Probate Equity Rectification of Wills Testator's Intention Clerical Error Failure to Understand Instructions

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jennifer Goodman

Claimant

Geoffrey Goodman

First Defendant

Richard Clegg

Second Defendant

Simon Manuel

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Rectification Application Under S.20 Administration of Justice Act 1982 / Judgment After Hearing of Rectification Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 3 of Guy Goodman's will should be rectified under s.20 Administration of Justice Act 1982 on the ground of failure to understand instructions

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence established on the balance of probabilities, with convincing evidence, that clause 3 was included in Guy Goodman's will due to a failure by the draftsman to understand instructions, and that Guy did not intend to confer a separate legacy of £2,000 per month to Geoffrey Goodman beyond the existing contractual arrangements. Rectification by excision of clause 3 is therefore ordered.

Court Disposition

Claim for rectification allowed

Orders

  • Clause 3 of Guy Goodman's will is to be excised.