The law affords people a high degree of testamentary freedom, and those seeking reasonable financial provision from an estate must satisfy the courts that it was unreasonable that adequate provision was not made for them. Recently, the High Court ruled that a woman who had been estranged from her father until nearly four years before his death was entitled to be provided for out of his estate.
The woman’s parents had separated when she was eight months old and she had been estranged from her father since then, apart from a phone call when she was 16 and one or two meetings at his mother’s house. He had been a successful businessman and property investor. He had made a will in 2014 leaving his entire estate to his wife, with whom he had begun a relationship at around the same time he and the woman’s mother had separated. The will included a declaration that he had not made any provision for the woman, stating that he had last seen her about 20 years ago.
In February 2019, however, he got in touch with her, and later that year she went on holiday with him to a family villa in Portugal. They became very close, seeing each other when possible and often speaking on the phone and messaging. She helped to look after his mother and assisted with his own health needs. In December 2022 he died unexpectedly, leaving an estate valued at nearly £1.6 million. She subsequently brought a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, seeking reasonable financial provision for her maintenance.
After assessing her financial position, the Court found the she was a necessitous claimant. In difficult circumstances, and with considerable self-discipline, she was just able to make ends meet, but only by either depriving herself and her family of any small luxuries or going into debt to afford them. Her two sons had a range of complex physical and learning disabilities, and she and her husband also suffered from health issues. Her father’s widow, on the other hand, was in a position of some financial strength even before inheriting her husband’s estate. He had transferred many of his assets into her name at around the time he had made the will.
The Court considered that the woman’s caring contributions, not only to her children but also to her father and her grandmother, constituted a special circumstance that tipped the balance in favour of her claim succeeding. The Court also took account of the fact that his stated reason for leaving her nothing – namely, the lack of contact for 20 years – had evaporated, to be replaced with a warm-hearted, caring father-daughter connection. Whilst there was no evidence that he had changed his mind about leaving her nothing, the stated basis for his intention had been entirely reversed. The Court also observed that an award to her would not deprive his widow of the bulk of the inheritance she stood to receive.
The Court ordered that provision of £123,418 be made for the woman. It proposed that most of that amount be paid into a discretionary trust, to avoid any adverse effect on the various benefits to which she was entitled.
