Report comment

Yes, an interesting one, Simon. And no, I was not suggesting he should not be able to claim. That argument was put to bed, or rather buried, in Ross v. Caunters. And there may yet be cases where the MIL is very wealthy and where the claim, plus all associated costs, are modest in relation.

But my point is that this bitter ex-husband has almost certainly ensured that neither his ex-wife nor his children, nor himself for that matter, gets anything from grandma's estate. Given that he must have been told this would be the result I might have been tempted to give him the order he wanted, but then told him he would have to pay all sides' costs personally. Assuming he could pay them himself that would have preserved the estate, at least to the end of this round, which appears to be round two.

I wonder what, if anything, those who witnessed this 'wil'l have to say about it? If there is in fact insufficient evidence of a forgery the claimant will lose the next round and the estate could remain intact for the intended beneficiaries.. And I wonder if a Part 36 offer was made?

I think that the ex-wife can at least console herself that she is well rid of such a husband.