Tucker v Felton-Page & Ors [2025] EWHC 530 (Ch) (12 March 2025)

Tucker v Felton-Page & Ors [2025] EWHC 530 (Ch) (12 March 2025)

The 2013 Will was invalid as the Deceased lacked testamentary capacity at the time of execution, as established by the joint expert evidence and unchallenged lay evidence. The court pronounced against the 2013 Will and for the validity of the 2006 Will. The claim of want of knowledge and approval was not made out, and no findings were made on undue influence or fraudulent calumny due to the nature of the paper trial. On costs, the court found it was reasonable for the Claimant to investigate up to the joint experts' report, but thereafter the litigation became hostile and costs should follow the event from that point.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 530 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Solveig Anne Tucker; First Defendant: Anne Felton-Page; Second Defendant: David Thomas Weir; Third Defendant: Dilwyns Solicitors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Contentious Probate / Final Judgment After Trial on the Papers and Costs Hearing
Outcome
The 2013 Will is pronounced against; the 2006 Will is pronounced for in solemn form. The Claimant is to pay the First and Second Defendants' costs from the date of the joint experts' report; no order as to costs prior to that date.
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Knowledge and Approval, Undue Influence, Fraudulent Calumny, Costs in Probate Litigation, Discontinuance of Claim
Probate Wills and Estates Civil Procedure Testamentary Capacity Knowledge and Approval Undue Influence Fraudulent Calumny Costs in Probate Litigation +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solveig Anne Tucker

Claimant

Anne Felton-Page

First Defendant

David Thomas Weir

Second Defendant

Dilwyns Solicitors

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contentious Probate / Final Judgment After Trial on the Papers and Costs Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2013 Will of Pamela Moore was valid and should be propounded in solemn form
  2. 2 Whether the Deceased had testamentary capacity at the time of the 2013 Will
  3. 3 Whether the Deceased knew and approved the contents of the 2013 Will

Ratio Decidendi

The 2013 Will was invalid as the Deceased lacked testamentary capacity at the time of execution, as established by the joint expert evidence and unchallenged lay evidence. The court pronounced against the 2013 Will and for the validity of the 2006 Will. The claim of want of knowledge and approval was not made out, and no findings were made on undue influence or fraudulent calumny due to the nature of the paper trial. On costs, the court found it was reasonable for the Claimant to investigate up to the joint experts' report, but thereafter the litigation became hostile and costs should follow the event from that point.

Court Disposition

The 2013 Will is pronounced against; the 2006 Will is pronounced for in solemn form. The Claimant is to pay the First and Second Defendants' costs from the date of the joint experts' report; no order as to costs prior to that date.

Orders

  • Pronouncement against the 2013 Will of Pamela Moore dated 11 January 2013
  • Pronouncement for the 2006 Will of Pamela Moore dated 4 May 2006 in solemn form