Poole & Anor v Everall & Ors [2016] EWHC 2126 (Ch) (19 August 2016)

Poole & Anor v Everall & Ors [2016] EWHC 2126 (Ch) (19 August 2016)

The December 2012 will was not valid. The court found that David Poole did not have testamentary capacity at the time of execution, did not know and approve the contents, and the circumstances gave rise to a strong suspicion of undue influence by Mark Everall, which was not rebutted. The February 2012 will was admitted to probate.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2126 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Darren John George Poole; Claimant: Sean Patrick Poole; Defendant: Mark Everall; Defendant: Susan White (by her litigation friend Ellenor Gibbs)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Probate Claim (challenge to Will) / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; December 2012 will declared invalid; February 2012 will admitted to probate.
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Undue Influence, Due Execution of Wills, Knowledge and Approval, Validity of Wills
Probate Wills and Estates Mental Capacity Testamentary Capacity Undue Influence Due Execution of Wills Knowledge and Approval Validity of Wills

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darren John George Poole

Claimant

Sean Patrick Poole

Claimant

Mark Everall

Defendant

Susan White (by her litigation friend Ellenor Gibbs)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate Claim (challenge to Will) / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the December 2012 will was duly executed
  2. 2 Whether David Poole had testamentary capacity at the time of the December 2012 will
  3. 3 Whether David Poole knew and approved the contents of the December 2012 will

Ratio Decidendi

The December 2012 will was not valid. The court found that David Poole did not have testamentary capacity at the time of execution, did not know and approve the contents, and the circumstances gave rise to a strong suspicion of undue influence by Mark Everall, which was not rebutted. The February 2012 will was admitted to probate.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; December 2012 will declared invalid; February 2012 will admitted to probate.

Orders

  • The December 2012 will is not admitted to probate.
  • The February 2012 will is admitted to probate.