Report comment

Until 1925 the English law of inheritance of land discriminated against daughters and younger sons; until 1970, well within the memory of some now in practice, it discriminated against children born out of wedlock.

And a if a testator, Muslim or not, wishes to make a will which prefers sons to daughters, or vice versa, or children born in wedlock to those born outside, or vice versa; or to exclude anyone in civil partnership or same-sex marriage; or to prefer one child over another for any reason whatever, that is that testator's right and it is the function of the solicitor whom he approaches to make sure his will gives effect to those wishes as far as possible and to give warning where it may not, because of the Family Provision Act. It's not the solicitor's duty to consider whether the testator should or should not act in that way.

So you see, Ashley Balls, the solicitor who draws up the will is upholding the law: the law of testamentary freedom. The comparison with polygamy - which is unlawful - is preposterous.


I have drawn up wills giving ridiculous amounts to animal charities, by a couple whose only relations were a nephew and a niece whom the Act would not help. I thought my clients were two sentimental fools but I drew up the wills and kept my opinions to myself.

So you see, Ashley Balls, the solicitor who draws up a will leaving which accords with sharia is upholding the law: the law of testamentary freedom. The comparison with polygamy is preposterous.