Ball & Ors v Ball & Ors

Ball & Ors v Ball & Ors

The will was valid as the testatrix had testamentary capacity, was not acting under undue influence, and was not labouring under a significant mistake. The exclusion of the claimants was a rational decision in the circumstances. The claimants failed to prove lack of capacity or undue influence. The will did not fail to make reasonable financial provision for the claimants under the 1975 Act, as they were not in financial need and no special circumstances or moral obligation arose.

Parties
Claimant: Nigel Ball; Claimant: Debra Churchward; Claimant: Barbara Briers; Defendant: Stephen Ball; Defendant: David Ball; Defendant: Sharon Ferry; Defendant: Elaine Roebuck; Defendant: Michelle Ball; Defendant: Stuart Ball; Defendant: Kevin Ball; Defendant: Cheryl Monaghan; Defendant: Mark Ball
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Probate Claim and Claim Under the Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Undue Influence, Reasonable Financial Provision, Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, Probate
Succession Law Family Law Testamentary Capacity Undue Influence Reasonable Financial Provision Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 Probate

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

Parties

Nigel Ball

Claimant

Debra Churchward

Claimant

Barbara Briers

Claimant

Stephen Ball

Defendant

David Ball

Defendant

Sharon Ferry

Defendant

Elaine Roebuck

Defendant

Michelle Ball

Defendant

Stuart Ball

Defendant

Kevin Ball

Defendant

Cheryl Monaghan

Defendant

Mark Ball

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate Claim and Claim Under the Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will of Barbara Olive Ball was invalid for lack of testamentary capacity
  2. 2 Whether the will was procured by undue influence
  3. 3 Whether the will failed to make reasonable financial provision for the claimants under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975

Ratio Decidendi

The will was valid as the testatrix had testamentary capacity, was not acting under undue influence, and was not labouring under a significant mistake. The exclusion of the claimants was a rational decision in the circumstances. The claimants failed to prove lack of capacity or undue influence. The will did not fail to make reasonable financial provision for the claimants under the 1975 Act, as they were not in financial need and no special circumstances or moral obligation arose.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed