Wharton v Bancroft & Ors (Rev 1) [2011] EWHC 3250 (Ch) (08 December 2011)

Wharton v Bancroft & Ors (Rev 1) [2011] EWHC 3250 (Ch) (08 December 2011)

The court found that the 2008 Will was validly executed, that George Wharton knew and approved its contents, and that there was no evidence of undue influence. The evidence established that the will reflected his true testamentary intentions, and the challenge by the Daughters failed.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 3250 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Maureen Wharton; First Defendant: Timothy John Bancroft; Second Defendant: James William Douglas Bancroft; Third Defendant: Victoria Wharton; Fourth Defendant: Gina Fagan; Fifth Defendant: Amanda Wharton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Probate / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; will of 23 September 2008 admitted to probate.
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Knowledge and Approval, Undue Influence, Revocation of Wills by Marriage, Inheritance Tax
Wills and Probate Testamentary Capacity Knowledge and Approval Undue Influence Revocation of Wills by Marriage Inheritance Tax

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

Parties

Maureen Wharton

Claimant

Timothy John Bancroft

First Defendant

James William Douglas Bancroft

Second Defendant

Victoria Wharton

Third Defendant

Gina Fagan

Fourth Defendant

Amanda Wharton

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will dated 23 September 2008 was the valid last will of George Wharton
  2. 2 Whether George Wharton knew and approved the contents of the 2008 Will
  3. 3 Whether the 2008 Will was procured by undue influence

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 2008 Will was validly executed, that George Wharton knew and approved its contents, and that there was no evidence of undue influence. The evidence established that the will reflected his true testamentary intentions, and the challenge by the Daughters failed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; will of 23 September 2008 admitted to probate.

Orders

  • Pronounced in favour of the will dated 23 September 2008.
  • Dismissed the counterclaim of the Daughters challenging the will.