Clarke v Brothwood & Ors [2006] EWHC 2939 (Ch) (16 November 2006)

Clarke v Brothwood & Ors [2006] EWHC 2939 (Ch) (16 November 2006)

The will failed to carry out the testatrix's intentions due to a clerical error in drafting, as the solicitor did not apply his mind to the significance of the fractional shares, resulting in 60% of the residue being undisposed of. The jurisdiction to rectify exists, and the will should be rectified to allocate the residue in percentage shares as intended.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 2939 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: John Robert Medbury Clarke; First Defendant: Katherine Brothwood; Second Defendant: Francis John Aston Martin; Third Defendant: Elizabeth Constance Anne Gill; Fourth Defendant: Elizabeth Adams; Fifth Defendant: Britt Martin; Sixth Defendant: Patrick Keef
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Rectification of Will / Judgment
Outcome
Will rectified
Legal Topics
Rectification of Wills, Clerical Error, Administration of Justice Act 1982 Section 20
Probate Wills and Estates Rectification of Wills Clerical Error Administration of Justice Act 1982 Section 20

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Robert Medbury Clarke

Claimant

Katherine Brothwood

First Defendant

Francis John Aston Martin

Second Defendant

Elizabeth Constance Anne Gill

Third Defendant

Elizabeth Adams

Fourth Defendant

Britt Martin

Fifth Defendant

Patrick Keef

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Rectification of Will / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will should be rectified under section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 due to clerical error
  2. 2 Whether the drafting error resulted in partial intestacy contrary to the testatrix's intentions

Ratio Decidendi

The will failed to carry out the testatrix's intentions due to a clerical error in drafting, as the solicitor did not apply his mind to the significance of the fractional shares, resulting in 60% of the residue being undisposed of. The jurisdiction to rectify exists, and the will should be rectified to allocate the residue in percentage shares as intended.

Court Disposition

Will rectified

Orders

  • The will is rectified to allocate the residue of the estate in percentage shares (10%, 10%, 20%, 20%, 20%, 20%) to the named beneficiaries as intended by the testatrix.