header-logo header-logo

22 September 2017
Issue: 6672 / Categories: Legal News , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Wills update: undue influence & other concerns

The Law Commission’s proposals on testamentary undue influence are ‘cause for concern’, Jonathan McDonagh, Serle Court, has warned.

Writing in NLJ this week, McDonagh critiques the Commission’s consultation, Making a will, due to close on 10 November. While the Commission has called the law out-of-date, McDonagh says there is no need to scrap it just because it was made by Victorians. On proposed reforms to introduce circumstances where a presumption of undue influence can be applied, he says it is ‘very difficult to see what could be achieved’.

Also in NLJ this week, Alison Regan, partner at Russell-Cooke, asks how far a charity should go to protect a charitable legacy, and the duties of charity trustees, particularly in the high-profile case of animal lover Tracy Leaning.

Geldards’ partner Giselle Davies, and legal executive Ellis Pugh, meanwhile, consider the Fundraising Preference Service, which screens junkmail, and ask if it will alleviate concerns about charity behaviour.

 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll