Ashman v Thomas [2016] EWHC 3806 (Ch) (21 June 2016)

Ashman v Thomas [2016] EWHC 3806 (Ch) (21 June 2016)

The presumption of due execution arising from a regular attestation clause was not rebutted in relation to the 2008 will, so it was validly executed. However, in relation to the 2011 and 2012 wills, the strongest evidence (including the deceased's housebound status and inability to travel) rebutted the presumption, and those wills were not validly executed before the attesting witnesses as required by section 9 of the Wills Act 1837.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 3806 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Alastair Ashman; Defendant: Clyde Thomas
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Probate Claim (preliminary Issues) / Judgment on Preliminary Issues After Trial
Outcome
The will dated 12 March 2008 was validly executed; the wills dated 5 November 2011 and 18 May 2012 were not validly executed.
Legal Topics
Due Execution of Wills, Section 9 Wills Act 1837, Presumption of Due Execution, Attestation Clause, Suspicious Circumstances, Knowledge and Approval, Burden of Proof
Probate Wills and Estates Due Execution of Wills Section 9 Wills Act 1837 Presumption of Due Execution Attestation Clause Suspicious Circumstances Knowledge and Approval +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alastair Ashman

Claimant

Clyde Thomas

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate Claim (preliminary Issues) / Judgment on Preliminary Issues After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will dated 12 March 2008 was validly executed under section 9 of the Wills Act 1837
  2. 2 Whether the will dated 5 November 2011 was validly executed under section 9 of the Wills Act 1837
  3. 3 Whether the will dated 18 May 2012 was validly executed under section 9 of the Wills Act 1837

Ratio Decidendi

The presumption of due execution arising from a regular attestation clause was not rebutted in relation to the 2008 will, so it was validly executed. However, in relation to the 2011 and 2012 wills, the strongest evidence (including the deceased's housebound status and inability to travel) rebutted the presumption, and those wills were not validly executed before the attesting witnesses as required by section 9 of the Wills Act 1837.

Court Disposition

The will dated 12 March 2008 was validly executed; the wills dated 5 November 2011 and 18 May 2012 were not validly executed.

Orders

  • Declaration that the will dated 12 March 2008 was validly executed in accordance with section 9 of the Wills Act 1837.
  • Declaration that the wills dated 5 November 2011 and 18 May 2012 were not validly executed in accordance with section 9 of the Wills Act 1837.