The High Court has removed a clause in an elderly man's final will that gave his wife a lifetime interest in half of his estate, ruling that the clause was invalid for want of knowledge and approval.

The man and his wife had married in 2011 after being in a relationship for many years. Each of them had three children from a previous marriage. He had been diagnosed with Parkinson's disease and by 2017 his health had begun to deteriorate. In January 2022 he suffered a series of falls and subsequently moved in with his daughter and son-in-law while attempts were made to arrange a care package that would allow him to return home. During this time he made a will leaving a life interest in 50 per cent of his estate to his wife, which would subsequently pass to his daughter absolutely. The other 50 per cent was left to his daughter and her children and grandchildren. He died in October 2022, leaving an estate worth £248,367.

His wife had been diagnosed with dementia earlier that year. A claim was brought on her behalf by her son, acting as her litigation friend, claiming that the will was invalid because he had not known or approved its contents, or alternatively that it had been procured by undue influence. A further claim was brought under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, claiming that the will did not make reasonable financial provision for his wife.

The Court observed that the man's position had changed since 2012, when he had made his previous will. He had sold his property and his entire estate was in cash or investments, and he had become resigned to no longer living with his wife because of their respective illnesses. He had clearly been happy living with his daughter and son-in-law and was grateful for the care they had given him.

However, the Court was not satisfied that he had known and approved of the effect of the life interest trust. It found that he would have understood that his wife would not only have had a regular income from the trust but would also be able to access the capital. There did not seem to have been any discussion about the level of income that the trust fund would have generated, which would have been a fundamental issue if he was to assess whether his wife would receive something of any meaningful value. The Court concluded that the wording giving effect to the life interest trust should be struck out, allowing his wife to receive half of his estate in accordance with his intentions.

The Court rejected the claim of undue influence. There had been good reasons for the man to reconsider his will at that point in his life, and the solicitor who had drafted the will had not had any concerns. Given the conclusion the Court had reached on knowledge and approval, his wife had achieved all that she could have achieved in a claim under the 1975 Act and the Court did not award her anything under it.