Wilson v. Hovell [1923] ScotLR 1 (25 October 1923)

Wilson v. Hovell [1923] ScotLR 1 (25 October 1923)

The holograph document, though ex facie a will, was accompanied by a covering letter creating ambiguity as to the deceased's testamentary intention; extrinsic evidence was admissible and established that the document was intended as instructions for a will, not as a testamentary instrument.

Citation
[1923] ScotLR 1
Parties
Pursuer: Andrew Colville Wilson; Defender: Flora Jane Hovell; Defender: James Patterson Wilson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
25 October 1923
Procedural Posture
Action of Declarator / Reclaiming Note (appeal) Against Final Interlocutor After Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Reclaiming note refused; judgment of the Lord Ordinary affirmed.
Legal Topics
Testamentary Intention, Holograph Will, Extrinsic Evidence, Ambiguity in Testamentary Documents, Proof Before Answer, Intestate Succession
Succession Evidence Civil Procedure Testamentary Intention Holograph Will Extrinsic Evidence Ambiguity in Testamentary Documents Proof Before Answer +1 more

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 28 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Colville Wilson

Pursuer

Flora Jane Hovell

Defender

James Patterson Wilson

Defender

Procedural Posture

Action of Declarator / Reclaiming Note (appeal) Against Final Interlocutor After Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a holograph document accompanied by an ambiguous covering letter constituted a valid will or mere instructions for a will
  2. 2 Whether extrinsic evidence is admissible to resolve ambiguity created by a covering letter accompanying a testamentary document

Ratio Decidendi

The holograph document, though ex facie a will, was accompanied by a covering letter creating ambiguity as to the deceased's testamentary intention; extrinsic evidence was admissible and established that the document was intended as instructions for a will, not as a testamentary instrument.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming note refused; judgment of the Lord Ordinary affirmed.

Orders

  • Declared that Mrs Christina Wilson left no valid and effectual testamentary directions.
  • Ordered that her estate falls to be divided according to the rules of intestate succession.