Ian Paul McLean & Ors v Brett Reginald McLean

Ian Paul McLean & Ors v Brett Reginald McLean

There was no legally binding agreement between Maureen and Reginald not to revoke or change the 2017 wills; only a moral obligation existed, insufficient for the mutual wills doctrine. Proprietary estoppel was not established as there was no binding assurance or reliance.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Ian Paul McLean; Claimant/appellant: Sean Andrew Frederick McLean; Claimant/appellant: Lorraine Pomeroy; Defendant/respondent: Brett Reginald McLean
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Mutual Wills, Proprietary Estoppel, Testamentary Trusts
Succession Equity Mutual Wills Proprietary Estoppel Testamentary Trusts

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ian Paul McLean

Claimant/appellant

Sean Andrew Frederick McLean

Claimant/appellant

Lorraine Pomeroy

Claimant/appellant

Brett Reginald McLean

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2017 wills constituted mutual wills creating a binding trust for all four children
  2. 2 Whether proprietary estoppel can substitute for a binding mutual wills agreement

Ratio Decidendi

There was no legally binding agreement between Maureen and Reginald not to revoke or change the 2017 wills; only a moral obligation existed, insufficient for the mutual wills doctrine. Proprietary estoppel was not established as there was no binding assurance or reliance.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed