Slattery & Ors v Jagger & Ors [2015] EWHC 3976 (Ch) (10 November 2015)

Slattery & Ors v Jagger & Ors [2015] EWHC 3976 (Ch) (10 November 2015)

The omission of the beneficiary's name in clause 3 of the will was a clerical error. The evidence, including solicitor's attendance notes and correspondence, clearly established that Mr Albert Jagger intended his share in the property at 39 Chichester Close to pass to his wife, Mrs Ruby Victoria Jagger, absolutely. The will should be rectified under section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 to include Mrs Jagger as the beneficiary in clause 3.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 3976 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mr Graham Slattery; Claimant: Mrs Ruby Victoria Jagger; Defendant: Mr Arthur Jagger; Defendant: David Jagger; Defendant: Matthew Jagger; Defendant: Gareth Jagger
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Probate/rectification of Will / First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Rectification of Wills, Construction of Wills, Clerical Error, Testator's Intention
Wills and Probate Equity Rectification of Wills Construction of Wills Clerical Error Testator's Intention

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

Parties

Mr Graham Slattery

Claimant

Mrs Ruby Victoria Jagger

Claimant

Mr Arthur Jagger

Defendant

David Jagger

Defendant

Matthew Jagger

Defendant

Gareth Jagger

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate/rectification of Will / First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 3 of the 2011 will of Mr Albert Jagger should be construed to pass his share in the property to Mrs Ruby Victoria Jagger
  2. 2 Whether the will should be rectified under section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 to include Mrs Jagger as beneficiary due to clerical error

Ratio Decidendi

The omission of the beneficiary's name in clause 3 of the will was a clerical error. The evidence, including solicitor's attendance notes and correspondence, clearly established that Mr Albert Jagger intended his share in the property at 39 Chichester Close to pass to his wife, Mrs Ruby Victoria Jagger, absolutely. The will should be rectified under section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 to include Mrs Jagger as the beneficiary in clause 3.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that on the true construction of the will, the testator's share in the property at 39 Chichester Close, Burnley, passes to Mrs Ruby Victoria Jagger.
  • Order for rectification of the will under section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 by the inclusion of the words 'to my wife Ruby Victoria Jagger' at clause 3.