Greaves v Stolkin [2013] EWHC 1140 (Ch) (03 May 2013)

Leslie Stolkin had testamentary capacity and knew and approved the contents of the Disputed Codicil when he executed it on 5 August 2009; the codicil is valid.

Citation: [2013] EWHC 1140 (Ch)
Parties: Claimant/defendant to Counterclaim/claimant in Additional Claim: Pauline Greaves; Defendant: Gary Matthew Stolkin; Third Party Defendant to Additional Claim: H. Montlake & Co
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 03 May 2013
Procedural Posture: Probate / Judgment on Validity of Codicil
Outcome: Disputed Codicil pronounced valid; Court pronounces in solemn form for Will and Disputed Codicil.
Legal Topics: Testamentary Capacity, Knowledge and Approval, Validity of Codicil, Burden of Proof, Inheritance Provision

Probate Wills and Estates Mental Capacity Testamentary Capacity Knowledge and Approval Validity of Codicil Burden of Proof Inheritance Provision

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7

Parties

Pauline Greaves

Claimant/defendant to Counterclaim/claimant in Additional Claim

Gary Matthew Stolkin

Defendant

H. Montlake & Co

Third Party Defendant to Additional Claim

Procedural Posture

Probate / Judgment on Validity of Codicil

Legal Issues

1 Whether Leslie Stolkin had testamentary capacity when executing the Disputed Codicil
2 Whether Leslie Stolkin knew and approved the contents of the Disputed Codicil

Ratio Decidendi

Leslie Stolkin had testamentary capacity and knew and approved the contents of the Disputed Codicil when he executed it on 5 August 2009; the codicil is valid.

Court Disposition

Disputed Codicil pronounced valid; Court pronounces in solemn form for Will and Disputed Codicil.

Orders

Pronouncement in solemn form for Will and Disputed Codicil
Consideration of Part 20 claims against Montlakes deferred