A judge who failed to explain how he had reached his decision as to the amount that should be awarded to a widow from her late husband's estate, in order to allow her to meet her future financial needs, recently found his decision overturned by the Court of Appeal. The widow in question had made a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, which allows dependants to apply for financial provision from the estate of the person on whom they were dependent if appropriate provision is not made in the will.
In this case, the estate was valued at £1.4m and belonged to a man who died 13 months after marrying his cleaner, whom he had only known for six months prior to the marriage.
In the lower court the judge ruled that the widow should receive £800,000 by way of a lump sum, but failed to explain the reasoning behind his decision. The executors appealed on behalf of the beneficiaries, claiming that the award did not reflect a proper balance of interests between the widow and the other beneficiaries. The Court of Appeal found that the judge's reasoning was flawed in several respects and considered that, given the brevity of the marriage, the original apportionment might not be appropriate.
It was decided that the widow should receive £600,000 which, after tax and legal costs, amounted to approximately 60 per cent of the value of the net estate.
This case is one of a series of judgments (mainly in the divorce courts) involving short marriages and high value estates. In circumstances such as these, case law is very persuasive and although settlements must be decided on the relevant facts, the quality of legal representation is of critical importance."
Tracy Creed, Head of Wills, Trust and Probate at Sydney Mitchell.
To talk about planning for your future, please call Tracy Creed on 0121 746 3320, email Tracy at t.creed@sydneymitchell.co.uk or fill in our online enquiry form.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
