Blackman & Ors. v Man [2007] EWHC 3162 (Ch) (07 December 2007)

Blackman & Ors. v Man [2007] EWHC 3162 (Ch) (07 December 2007)

On the balance of probabilities, Mrs. Bechal had testamentary capacity when she made both the May and August 1994 wills, satisfying the Banks v Goodfellow test. She knew and approved the contents of the wills, which accurately reflected her instructions. There were no suspicious circumstances sufficient to shift the burden further. The August 1994 will is valid.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 3162 (Ch)
Parties
Claimants: Sandra Blackman & Ors.; Defendants: Kim Sing Man & Ors.; Defendant: Third Defendant (Executor); Defendant: Her Majesty's Attorney General
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Probate/contentious Wills / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed; August 1994 will pronounced valid.
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Knowledge and Approval, Validity of Wills, Banks V Goodfellow Test, Costs in Probate Litigation
Probate Wills and Estates Mental Capacity Testamentary Capacity Knowledge and Approval Validity of Wills Banks V Goodfellow Test Costs in Probate Litigation

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

Parties

Sandra Blackman & Ors.

Claimants

Kim Sing Man & Ors.

Defendants

Third Defendant (Executor)

Defendant

Her Majesty's Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate/contentious Wills / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mrs. Golda Bechal had testamentary capacity when executing her 1994 wills
  2. 2 Whether Mrs. Bechal knew and approved the contents of the 1994 wills

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities, Mrs. Bechal had testamentary capacity when she made both the May and August 1994 wills, satisfying the Banks v Goodfellow test. She knew and approved the contents of the wills, which accurately reflected her instructions. There were no suspicious circumstances sufficient to shift the burden further. The August 1994 will is valid.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; August 1994 will pronounced valid.

Orders

  • Validity of the August 1994 will pronounced.
  • Costs to be determined, with submissions heard regarding whether costs should follow the event or be paid out of the estate.