Bisson v Weaver
Bisson v Weaver [2013] 2 JLR_Note 13 (29 July 2013)
A Jersey Law Reports note concerning whether a will may be varied under succession law.
- Variation of wills
- Succession
- Wills
- Variation-of-wills
Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Jersey decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Bisson v Weaver [2013] 2 JLR_Note 13 (29 July 2013)
A Jersey Law Reports note concerning whether a will may be varied under succession law.
Representation of Reid Will [2008] JRC 213 (10 December 2008)
The court held that the deceased remained domiciled in England and Wales, admitted a photocopy of the second will to probate, and found the Jersey estate was covered by that will.
In re Greig v [2006] JLR_Note 11 (20 April 2006)
A Jersey probate note concerning succession, wills, and probate in In re Greig. The accessible record provides only citation and classification metadata.
In re Vickers v [2001] JLR 712 (29 November 2001)
The court held that a general revocation clause did not clearly revoke a prior will concerning property in another country, absent clear testamentary intention.
In re Ruellan v [2001] JLR 286 (18 May 2001)
The court held that heirs may ratify and validate an otherwise invalid will in a succession matter.
In re Forbes v [1995] JLR 261 (06 September 1995)
A suicide note with testamentary intent was admitted as a holograph will. The court held the date need not be handwritten if proved by extrinsic evidence.
In re Vibert v [1987] JLR 96 (20 March 1987)
The court held that extrinsic evidence of a testator’s intention may be admitted to interpret a will, including inserting additional words where necessary.
In re Tomlinson v [1974] JJ 147 (13 November 1974)
The case concerned procedure for annulling a will of realty and pleading rules, including that only facts in issue must be pleaded, not evidential detail.
In re Wardlaw-Milne v [1970] JJ 1539 (08 September 1970)
The case states that extrinsic evidence is generally inadmissible to add to or explain a will’s express terms, subject to limited exceptions.
Jackson v Jackson [1966] JJ 579 (14 February 1966)
An action to annul a will of realty was non-suited because it was started by the wrong process. The court held it must be begun by bille de prevot, not order of justice.
Explore more