Evans & Ors v Lloyd & Anor [2013] EWHC 1725 (Ch) (24 June 2013)

Evans & Ors v Lloyd & Anor [2013] EWHC 1725 (Ch) (24 June 2013)

The court held that the relationship between Wynne Evans and the defendants was not one of such trust, confidence, or dependence as to give rise to a presumption of undue influence. Wynne was independent in his affairs, the gifts were his own idea, and the transactions could be explained by ordinary motives. There was no evidence of unconscionable conduct by the defendants, nor that Wynne suffered from a relevant special disadvantage. The claim for rescission failed. The court found on the evidence that Wynne had made a will in favour of David Lloyd, which had been lost, and ordered that it be admitted to probate.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 1725 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Howell Evans; Claimant: David Bernard Evans; Claimant: Helen Brenda Evans; Defendant: David Edward Rees Lloyd; Defendant: Elizabeth Eleanor Lloyd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / First Instance Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed; counterclaim allowed.
Legal Topics
Undue Influence, Unconscionable Transactions, Gifts, Lost Wills, Probate, Rescission
Equity Property Law Succession Law Undue Influence Unconscionable Transactions Gifts Lost Wills Probate +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 3 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Howell Evans

Claimant

David Bernard Evans

Claimant

Helen Brenda Evans

Claimant

David Edward Rees Lloyd

Defendant

Elizabeth Eleanor Lloyd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Civil Claim / First Instance Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether gifts of agricultural holdings by Wynne Evans to the defendants should be set aside for undue influence or as unconscionable transactions
  2. 2 Whether the defendants are entitled to have a lost will admitted to probate

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the relationship between Wynne Evans and the defendants was not one of such trust, confidence, or dependence as to give rise to a presumption of undue influence. Wynne was independent in his affairs, the gifts were his own idea, and the transactions could be explained by ordinary motives. There was no evidence of unconscionable conduct by the defendants, nor that Wynne suffered from a relevant special disadvantage. The claim for rescission failed. The court found on the evidence that Wynne had made a will in favour of David Lloyd, which had been lost, and ordered that it be admitted to probate.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; counterclaim allowed.

Orders

  • The claim to set aside the gifts of Tanyfron and Waenhir is dismissed.
  • The lost will of Wynne Evans is to be admitted to probate.