Devas & Ors v Mackay [2009] EWHC 1951 (Ch) (31 July 2009)

Devas & Ors v Mackay [2009] EWHC 1951 (Ch) (31 July 2009)

On the balance of probabilities, Mrs Devas lacked testamentary capacity on 1 November 2005, and there is no evidence she knew and approved the contents of the disputed will. The circumstances surrounding the will's execution were highly suspicious, and the defendant failed to discharge the burden of proof. Relief is granted in favour of the 2002 will.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 1951 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Angela Dorothea Devas; Claimant: Elizabeth Ferelith Mary Devas; Claimant: Magdalen Catherine Devas; Claimant: Annabel Devas; Defendant: Marcus Mackay
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Probate Action / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed. Pronouncement against the force and validity of the disputed will; 2002 will admitted to probate in solemn form.
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Knowledge and Approval, Suspicious Circumstances, Burden of Proof, Homemade Will, Undue Influence (not Pursued)
Probate Wills and Estates Testamentary Capacity Knowledge and Approval Suspicious Circumstances Burden of Proof Homemade Will Undue Influence (not Pursued)

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angela Dorothea Devas

Claimant

Elizabeth Ferelith Mary Devas

Claimant

Magdalen Catherine Devas

Claimant

Annabel Devas

Claimant

Marcus Mackay

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate Action / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mrs Devas had testamentary capacity on 1 November 2005
  2. 2 Whether Mrs Devas knew and approved the contents of the disputed will dated 1 November 2005

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities, Mrs Devas lacked testamentary capacity on 1 November 2005, and there is no evidence she knew and approved the contents of the disputed will. The circumstances surrounding the will's execution were highly suspicious, and the defendant failed to discharge the burden of proof. Relief is granted in favour of the 2002 will.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed. Pronouncement against the force and validity of the disputed will; 2002 will admitted to probate in solemn form.

Orders

  • 2002 will of Mrs Devas dated 23 July 2002 to be admitted to probate in solemn form
  • Pronouncement against the disputed will dated 1 November 2005