header-logo header-logo

16 February 2012 / Paul Grimwood
Issue: 7501 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Be prepared

Will-makers should put their affairs in order early, says Paul Grimwood

Last year’s television series Can’t take it with you, starring Sir Gerry Robinson, was compulsory viewing in my household. The premise of the series was that, if there was likely to be a dispute after someone’s death about the contents of their will then it was better to try to agree a “settlement”, usually involving the whole family, while the will-maker was still alive.

Of course, once the cameras had been packed up and the film makers had gone away, the will-maker was free to change their will, possibly making a new one in radically different terms. Alternatively, the good intentions of everyone concerned could have been thwarted by someone connected to the will-maker making an application under the Inheritance (Provision for Family & Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975) after they have died.

Recognised applicants

The first hurdle for an applicant is to establish that they can bring themselves within one of the categories of “recognised applicants” under s 1 of I(PFD)A 1975 (as amended). If they can then prove to the court

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll