Court of Appeal Analyses Will Revocation Clause in Guideline Decision

Emma Walker Watson Ramsbottom Solicitors

Included in most people’s wills is a clause that has the effect of revoking all their previous wills. Such straightforward provisions are usually uncontentious but, as a guideline Court of Appeal ruling recently reviewed by Emma Walker showed, they can give rise to difficulties where a testator has assets both in England and abroad.

A businessman had substantial assets in England and India when he died at the age of 72. He made a will in 2007 dealing with all of those assets. However, he made another will in 2016 which disposed only of his Indian assets. The 2016 will was declared to be his last and included a clause that revoked all such previous documents.

After an inheritance dispute broke out between members of his family, a judge found that the meaning of the revocation clause could not have been clearer and that it revoked the 2007 will in its entirety. That meant that the businessman died intestate – without having a valid will in place – save in respect of his Indian estate.

A more senior judge, however, subsequently took a different view on appeal: he found that the revocation clause was only effective to revoke the 2007 will to the extent that it dealt with the businessman’s Indian assets. That meant that his English assets would be distributed in accordance with the 2007 will.

Upholding a challenge to the latter ruling, the Court noted that, given the clear and unambiguous terms of the revocation clause, the businessman was, on the face of it, to be taken as having intended the 2016 will to be not only his primary will but his only will. Circumstantial and other evidence before the Court fell short of displacing such a conclusion.

The businessman may well have assumed that all but a relatively modest lump of his English assets had already been dealt with by way of lifetime gifts. He may have regarded his English estate as less pressing and something that could be dealt with at a later date. The legal presumption that he did not intend to die intestate was quite weak in the circumstances and insufficient to overcome the natural meaning of the revocation clause. The Court’s ruling meant that the 2007 will had been wholly revoked.

We can ensure that your wishes are made clear in an expertly drafted and valid will.

We’ve Got Your Back

Partner Note
Sangha v Sangha [2023] EWCA Civ 660

We've Got Your Back

If you need assistance or advice in regard to any aspect of this issue, we can help

Call Emma on 01254 88 08 31, email enquiries@watsonramsbottom.com, talk to us via live chat or complete our online enquiry form and one of our experts will contact you.

Leave a Reply