Is a Promise Made in Life Still Binding in Death?
When promises are made but not kept, the law does not always provide redress for a disappointed person. As a recent judgment by the Court of Appeal illustrates, when someone dies without making it clear, by a will, who should inherit his estate, this can result in an outcome very different from that which the deceased person intended, warns Teresa Waters, Partner at Waters & Co., Solicitors.
In 2007 the High Court initially ruled that a farmer, who helped a relative run his farm for more than 20 years should be awarded the property, even though there was no will to this effect. David Thorner started helping his cousin, Peter Thorner, run his 400 acre farm in Somerset when Peter began to suffer from ill health. What was, at first, a temporary measure became a lifetime of commitment, and David spent the next 25 years working on the farm, without taking a holiday, and, sometimes, working up to 18 hours a day. He was never paid for his work, surviving on a modest allowance from his parents.
Peter Thorner had revoked a will he had made in 1997, in order to exclude a beneficiary he had fallen out with. He never made another. The will had left the farm, and most of his estate, to David. On Peter’s death in 2005, as no will could be found, the laws of intestacy applied so the estate passed to the nearest relatives.
In the High Court, David argued that the two men had an understanding that, on Peter’s death, David would inherit the farm and it would therefore be unfair to divide the estate according to the intestacy laws. The Court initially accepted this argument, and awarded him the farm and the agricultural assets. Non-agricultural assets of approximately £1m were awarded to Peter’s relatives.
Two of Peter’s sisters, and a niece, were not happy with this decision and appealed against it. Three appeal judges have now ruled that, although David had a ‘strong moral claim’ to the property, that claim should not have been upheld and it would be a ‘dangerous precedent’ for him to inherit the property. Whatever Peter Thorner’s wishes were, there was no evidence that he had made a firm promise to David that he would inherit the farm.
Permission to appeal to the House of Lords was refused and David Thorner was ordered to pay the claimants legal costs.
“Peter Thorner’s failure to leave a valid will resulted in years of expensive legal wrangling. All of that expenditure was avoidable. Anyone who has assets and is intestate, should understand the benefits of making, or the consequences of not making, a will. The laws of intestacy are often not fair and, as is illustrated in this case, a moral claim, however strong, is not a legal right,” advises Teresa Waters.
Waters & Co., is still participating in The Institute of Cancer Research “Will for Free” scheme which is open to those aged 50 or over (it does not cover tax planning schemes). If you do not have a Will and qualify, please telephone Teresa Waters at Waters & Co. on 01675 463855 for an appointment.
The information contained in this newsletter was prepared in September 2008 and is intended for general guidance only. It provides information in a concise form and is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice. If you would like advice specific to your circumstances, please arrange for an appointment to discuss.
In 2007 the High Court initially ruled that a farmer, who helped a relative run his farm for more than 20 years should be awarded the property, even though there was no will to this effect. David Thorner started helping his cousin, Peter Thorner, run his 400 acre farm in Somerset when Peter began to suffer from ill health. What was, at first, a temporary measure became a lifetime of commitment, and David spent the next 25 years working on the farm, without taking a holiday, and, sometimes, working up to 18 hours a day. He was never paid for his work, surviving on a modest allowance from his parents.
Peter Thorner had revoked a will he had made in 1997, in order to exclude a beneficiary he had fallen out with. He never made another. The will had left the farm, and most of his estate, to David. On Peter’s death in 2005, as no will could be found, the laws of intestacy applied so the estate passed to the nearest relatives.
In the High Court, David argued that the two men had an understanding that, on Peter’s death, David would inherit the farm and it would therefore be unfair to divide the estate according to the intestacy laws. The Court initially accepted this argument, and awarded him the farm and the agricultural assets. Non-agricultural assets of approximately £1m were awarded to Peter’s relatives.
Two of Peter’s sisters, and a niece, were not happy with this decision and appealed against it. Three appeal judges have now ruled that, although David had a ‘strong moral claim’ to the property, that claim should not have been upheld and it would be a ‘dangerous precedent’ for him to inherit the property. Whatever Peter Thorner’s wishes were, there was no evidence that he had made a firm promise to David that he would inherit the farm.
Permission to appeal to the House of Lords was refused and David Thorner was ordered to pay the claimants legal costs.
“Peter Thorner’s failure to leave a valid will resulted in years of expensive legal wrangling. All of that expenditure was avoidable. Anyone who has assets and is intestate, should understand the benefits of making, or the consequences of not making, a will. The laws of intestacy are often not fair and, as is illustrated in this case, a moral claim, however strong, is not a legal right,” advises Teresa Waters.
Waters & Co., is still participating in The Institute of Cancer Research “Will for Free” scheme which is open to those aged 50 or over (it does not cover tax planning schemes). If you do not have a Will and qualify, please telephone Teresa Waters at Waters & Co. on 01675 463855 for an appointment.
The information contained in this newsletter was prepared in September 2008 and is intended for general guidance only. It provides information in a concise form and is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice. If you would like advice specific to your circumstances, please arrange for an appointment to discuss.
