Barrett v Bem & Ors [2011] EWHC 1247 (Ch) (19 May 2011)

Barrett v Bem & Ors [2011] EWHC 1247 (Ch) (19 May 2011)

The 2004 Will was not signed by Martin Lavin nor with sufficient physical contribution from him to constitute a valid guided hand signature. However, the evidence established that Anne Liston signed the 2004 Will at Martin's direction, in his presence and in the presence of the witnesses, after he attempted and failed to sign it himself. Martin had approved the contents of the Will and intended it to be his last testament. Therefore, the 2004 Will was validly executed under section 9(a) of the Wills Act 1837.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1247 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Michael Barrett; First Defendant: Hanora Bem; Second Defendant: Matthew Bem; Third Defendant: Alexander Bem; Fourth Defendant: Sophie Bem; Fifth Defendant: Eta Meehan; Sixth Defendant: Beatrice O'Shea; Seventh Defendant: Eamonn Barrett
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Probate Action / Retrial Following Court of Appeal Remittal
Outcome
The 2004 Will is valid and admitted to probate.
Legal Topics
Validity of Will, Execution of Will, Section 9 Wills Act 1837, Knowledge and Approval, Signature by Direction, Guided Hand Signature
Probate Wills and Estates Validity of Will Execution of Will Section 9 Wills Act 1837 Knowledge and Approval Signature by Direction Guided Hand Signature

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Barrett

Claimant

Hanora Bem

First Defendant

Matthew Bem

Second Defendant

Alexander Bem

Third Defendant

Sophie Bem

Fourth Defendant

Eta Meehan

Fifth Defendant

Beatrice O'Shea

Sixth Defendant

Eamonn Barrett

Seventh Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate Action / Retrial Following Court of Appeal Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2004 Will was validly executed under section 9(a) of the Wills Act 1837
  2. 2 Whether the signature on the 2004 Will was that of the deceased or made at his direction
  3. 3 Whether the deceased knew and approved the contents of the 2004 Will

Ratio Decidendi

The 2004 Will was not signed by Martin Lavin nor with sufficient physical contribution from him to constitute a valid guided hand signature. However, the evidence established that Anne Liston signed the 2004 Will at Martin's direction, in his presence and in the presence of the witnesses, after he attempted and failed to sign it himself. Martin had approved the contents of the Will and intended it to be his last testament. Therefore, the 2004 Will was validly executed under section 9(a) of the Wills Act 1837.

Court Disposition

The 2004 Will is valid and admitted to probate.

Orders

  • Pronouncement in favour of the validity of the 2004 Will dated 11 January 2004.
  • Revocation of the grant of probate in respect of the 2002 Will.