Contentious Probate Solicitors

In the Neate v Heselden case, we represented Susan Pope, a friend and carer of the deceased, Raymond Watts, who had amended his will to leave her the bulk of his estate. Watts’s stepdaughter, Beverley Neate, challenged the will’s validity, alleging that he lacked full understanding and approval when making these changes due to alleged undue influence.

The case presented several complexities. Watts’s estate changes were significant, transferring primary inheritance from a family member to a non-relative, which can often lead to suspicion in probate cases. Proving Watts’s mental clarity and independence at the time of the will’s execution required careful evidence analysis, especially given the relationship dynamics with his stepdaughter.

Myerson’s contentious probate team, led by Senior Associate Eleanor Clarke, meticulously reviewed medical records, personal testimonies, and the timeline of the will’s changes. The team built a strong case for Pope, focusing on Watts’s clear testamentary intent and the nature of his estrangement from Neate, which added context to the will's contents.

The High Court upheld the will, dismissing Neate’s objections and affirming the validity of Watts’s final wishes. Pope retained her rightful inheritance under the will.

Read more here.

Reported on in The Telegraph, Mail Online, The Times, The Mirror and The Sun.

Myerson Solicitors successfully represented Jacqueline Syder, securing a £45,000 award from her estranged husband’s estate.

Despite no provision in his will, the High Court ruled in Syder’s favour, given her financial contributions to their marital home and their legal marriage status at his death.

The case, handled by Myerson's Contentious Probate team, highlights key issues on financial claims in estranged spouse inheritance cases and the treatment of marital homes in probate claims.

Reflecting on the judgment, Jennifer McGuinness, Partner in our Contentious Probate Team, said:

"We are pleased to have secured a positive outcome for our client in what was a sensitive case. This judgment emphasises that the circumstances surrounding termination of marriage by death compared with a breakdown of relationship are "undeniably different". The position is often misunderstood. The approach to these sorts of cases is nuanced and fact sensitive. We hope this outcome brings Ms Syder some security and peace of mind; it has been a pleasure to work with her."

Ms Syder commented:

"During the process, I did at times find myself emotionally overwhelmed and stressed; however, the contentious probate team at Myerson went above and beyond to support me and guide me through the options, giving me time to evaluate my position. Collectively, they made me feel supported and confident in my claim."

Read more here.

We successfully acted for Laura Smith in her claim challenging the validity of her late mum’s Will. Laura’s mum had left a “homemade Will” where she made her husband, Laura’s stepfather, the sole executor and beneficiary. Laura was not included, which was odd given that she had a close relationship with her mother. 

Laura’s stepfather maintained that the Will was valid, but Laura was adamant that the Will was suspicious and very unlikely to have been prepared and witnessed properly. We contacted the witnesses and obtained evidence supporting Laura’s claim to overturn the Will. The witnesses clearly were not present with Laura’s mum when she signed her Will. The requirement of the Wills Act 1837 specifically requires the witnesses to be present at the same time and has other important requirements which need to be followed so that the Will is valid. 

Laura’s case was heard at a 2-day trial on 10th and 11th March 2022 in Manchester Business & Property Court, with both witnesses giving evidence. Laura’s stepfather defended the claim himself and failed in his defence entirely. Laura’s case was successful, and an independent administrator is now dealing with the estate. Laura will receive an equal entitlement with her brother in due course under the intestacy rules, but had she not pursued this claim, she would have received nothing.

This is one of several cases in which we have acted which have been publicised. It is very rare for cases to reach trial, but it is clear that Laura’s determination, together with our expertise in this area, ensured a very successful outcome which validated her decision to engage us and pursue this matter to the end.

We are acting for a mother who has brought a claim for and on behalf of her minor child under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

The deceased died, leaving a sizeable estate, but failed to make any provision for his minor child. His child was born following the ending of his relationship with the mother, and he actively chose not to be involved either emotionally, physically or financially in respect of the child's life. Financial payments were only made after the involvement of third-party authorities and were minimal and sporadic.

Due to the estrangement that arose between the deceased and the mother, she remained unaware of his sudden passing, and it was by chance that an enquiry established that the deceased had died, leaving a new partner and a sizeable estate. The executors of his estate had obtained a Grant of Probate, and by the time of our instruction, the estate administration was well advanced. The six month period in which to bring a claim under the Inheritance Act was fast approaching and required urgent and immediate legal help to not only investigate the deceased's estate but also to ensure that it was secure and the assets of the same were secured and not dissipated.

In accordance with the required protocols, we intimated our client's claim at the earliest possible opportunity and, following negotiation with the solicitors acting for the estate and its beneficiaries, were able to secure a substantial financial settlement for the child.

Settlements involving children who are under the age of 18 need to be approved by a Judge, and the terms of settlement that have been reached are being structured to be as tax advantageous to the parties involved as possible and capable of final approval by the Judge.

We are acting for the deceased’s mother in defending a claim by his partner, who seeks to uphold a Will she maintains he made in early 2020. Our client argues that the 2020 Will is invalid, that his son did not make it and that it and his signature to the same are a forgery.

The deceased died suddenly in early 2020 and left a Will purportedly leaving the entirety of his estate to his partner. The deceased did not make a previous Will and died without leaving a wife, civil partner, or children. It is in his partner’s interest to ensure this Will is admitted to probate. Otherwise, she would not benefit from his estate.

By contrast, our client maintains that this Will is a forgery, and through our assistance, an expert’s report has been obtained, which is highly critical of the existing Will and supports our client’s claim that not only is the Will invalid, but the signature of the deceased is not his.

We have enormous confidence in the outcome of our client’s defence and that she will successfully set aside the Will. Cases involving forgery/fraud are incredibly rare and unusual, but in circumstances where suspicion arises, and motive for dishonesty is a factor, the clear benefit of obtaining advice and assistance is crucial.

We acted in 2021 in a rare contested Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 claim which reached trial. We offered a no-win no-fee agreement to enable our client, Barrie Higgins, to instruct us in relation to this matter.

Barrie was the stepson of the Deceased, who had died intestate in 2017. The effect was that the entire estate would pass to his distant cousins. It was Barrie’s case that this was entirely contrary to his stepfather’s wishes and that he had been assured on more than one occasion that the Deceased had made a Will in his favour. Despite a considerable investigation, no such Will was ever found.

Although not related by blood, they were extremely close, and Barrie’s stepfather was involved in Barrie’s upbringing from a young age. The closeness was demonstrated by the fact that Barrie changed his surname to the Deceased’s and received continuing financial support from him throughout his life.

Unfortunately, unlike many cases, Barrie’s case could not be settled without court proceedings being issued. The Judge heard his claim just over 12 months after the court issued his claim. As we were still in Covid-19 at the time, the trial was dealt with remotely over two days, with the Judge providing his written judgment at a later date.

Barrie’s claim was entirely successful, and he was awarded £55,000 and a costs order in his favour. Unusually, within the award was a contribution towards his success fee. Despite the loving and close relationship Barrie had with his stepfather, had he not pursued the claim to this extent, he would have received nothing. This was not in keeping with the Deceased’s values and the bond that they shared.

More information about this and the academic points can be found on the following link.