Whilst there is no legal obligation on any parent to leave their estate to their children in equal shares or indeed to leave it to their children at all if they have reached the age of majority, it is often the case that parents do treat siblings the same and siblings certainly expect to be treated equally.
Can adult children bring inheritance act claims - Part 2?
In my previous article, I considered a claim where an adult child had been successful in bringing a claim under the Inheritance Act (Provision for Family & Dependants) Act 1974 (“the Act”) following the death of her father. In this article, I consider the recent case of Miles V Shearer  where the adult daughters were not successful with their claim.
It is often considered by many practitioners to be the case that adult children cannot bring a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family & Dependants) Act 1975 (“the Act”). This is often because in practice many adult children have found their own way in life and have no ongoing need for financial assistance. However, the fact that the child is an adult child does not of itself prevent that child from bringing such a claim – the question for the court to consider is whether a will (or intestacy) provides reasonable financial provision for the applicant’s maintenance. This was the question the court had to consider in the recent case of Rochford v Rochford .
Sometimes a case comes along that has so many issues for consideration you could almost be forgiven for not appreciating that when all said and done the underlying issues in the case are such that it amounts to a probate claim. One such case is the recent case of Ugolor & Ors V Ugolor .
There are two things certain in life: death and taxes. This oft-quoted idiom actually derives from a letter written by Benjamin Franklin in 1789 but would not feel out of place in a tweet in 2021. And, as we know, when it comes to Inheritance tax (IHT); death leads to taxes.
In the recent case of Wickham V Riley & Ors  the court was asked to determine whether the claimant, Alexander Wickham (“Alexander”) had had capacity to discontinue proceedings he had issued with his twin sister, Isabelle under and Inheritance (Provision for Family & Dependants) Act 1975 (“the Act”) following the death of their father, Anthony John Wickham (“Anthony”) and if so, whether he should be granted permission to extend time to bring a fresh set of proceedings, the primary limitation period having expired.
The provisions of Section 9 of the Wills Act 1837 (“the Act”) have been in force for over 180 years. Despite this, the question of whether a will has been validly executed continues to come before the courts and this was the position in the recent case of Re Robert Whalley (deceased) V Ebrahimi .
Lack of want of knowledge and approval - Is the will valid?
In the recent case of Mundil-Williams V Williams & Ors  the High Court upheld a challenge to a will on grounds of want of knowledge and approval in a case in which there were no questions about testamentary capacity and the will was drafted by a firm of solicitors, read over by the testator and duly executed.
Is the will a forgery and who bears the burden of proof?
When an allegation is made that a will has been forged, who does the burden of proof lie with? This was the issue that His Honour Judge Hodge QC sitting at the Chancery Division of Liverpool District Registry had to decide in the recent case of Face v Cunningham & Anor .