Lloyd v Jones & Ors

Lloyd v Jones & Ors

Mrs Harris was suffering from dementia by May 2004 but retained sufficient testamentary capacity at the time of executing her will in February 2005. She understood the nature and effect of the will, the extent of her property, and the claims of her children. The will was read and understood by her, and its terms reflected her longstanding intentions. There was no evidence of undue influence or suspicious circumstances sufficient to invalidate the will. The claimant's challenge failed and the will was upheld as valid.

Parties
Claimant: Sian Lloyd; First Defendant: Hedydd Parry Jones; Second Defendant: David Walter Jeremy Jones; Third Defendant: John James Harris; Fourth Defendant: Katherine Valmai Harris
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Probate/contentious Probate / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed; will upheld as valid
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Knowledge and Approval, Validity of Will, Burden of Proof, Banks V Goodfellow Test
Succession Law Probate Civil Procedure Testamentary Capacity Knowledge and Approval Validity of Will Burden of Proof Banks V Goodfellow Test

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sian Lloyd

Claimant

Hedydd Parry Jones

First Defendant

David Walter Jeremy Jones

Second Defendant

John James Harris

Third Defendant

Katherine Valmai Harris

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate/contentious Probate / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the deceased, Mrs Doris Maglona Harris, had testamentary capacity at the time of executing her will on 26 February 2005
  2. 2 Whether Mrs Harris knew and approved the contents of her will
  3. 3 Whether the will was procured in suspicious circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

Mrs Harris was suffering from dementia by May 2004 but retained sufficient testamentary capacity at the time of executing her will in February 2005. She understood the nature and effect of the will, the extent of her property, and the claims of her children. The will was read and understood by her, and its terms reflected her longstanding intentions. There was no evidence of undue influence or suspicious circumstances sufficient to invalidate the will. The claimant's challenge failed and the will was upheld as valid.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; will upheld as valid

Orders

  • The claim challenging the validity of the will is dismissed.
  • The will of Doris Maglona Harris dated 26 February 2005 is declared valid.