May & Ors v Middlemas & Anor [2024] EWHC 2761 (Ch) (04 September 2024)

May & Ors v Middlemas & Anor [2024] EWHC 2761 (Ch) (04 September 2024)

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the will dated 2 January 2020 was not genuine and was not signed by the deceased. The expert forensic evidence established the signature was not that of the deceased, and the circumstances of the will's production were inherently suspicious. The will was therefore invalid and the estate should be administered on intestacy.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2761 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mrs Mary May; Claimant: Mr Edmund William Knowles; Claimant: Mr Arthur Knowles; Claimant: Mr John Knowles; Claimant: Mrs Sandra Elizabeth Makin; Claimant: Mrs Elizabeth Molyneux (substituted by Mrs Pauline Hill); Defendant: Mr Timothy Stuart Middlemas; Defendant: Mr Jeffrey Knowles
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Probate Claim / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed. Pronouncement against the disputed will. Grant of letters of administration on intestacy directed.
Legal Topics
Forgery of Will, Validity of Will, Intestacy, Standard of Proof in Civil Fraud, Grant of Letters of Administration
Probate Wills and Estates Civil Procedure Forgery of Will Validity of Will Intestacy Standard of Proof in Civil Fraud Grant of Letters of Administration

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

Parties

Mrs Mary May

Claimant

Mr Edmund William Knowles

Claimant

Mr Arthur Knowles

Claimant

Mr John Knowles

Claimant

Mrs Sandra Elizabeth Makin

Claimant

Mrs Elizabeth Molyneux (substituted by Mrs Pauline Hill)

Claimant

Mr Timothy Stuart Middlemas

Defendant

Mr Jeffrey Knowles

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate Claim / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will dated 2 January 2020 is valid
  2. 2 Whether the signature on the will is that of the deceased or a forgery
  3. 3 Whether the will complies with section 9 of the Wills Act 1837

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the will dated 2 January 2020 was not genuine and was not signed by the deceased. The expert forensic evidence established the signature was not that of the deceased, and the circumstances of the will's production were inherently suspicious. The will was therefore invalid and the estate should be administered on intestacy.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed. Pronouncement against the disputed will. Grant of letters of administration on intestacy directed.

Orders

  • Pronouncement against the will dated 2 January 2020
  • Direction for grant of letters of administration on intestacy