UNIT 1 - Validity of Will and Intestacy Flashcards
A woman died last week. In her valid will, she left her entire estate to a registered charity. She owned a half share in her house as a beneficial tenant in common with her husband. The proceeds of her life policy are payable to her estate. She also owned some shares in quoted companies, money in a bank account and she held a life interest in a trust created by her father’s will.
What will the charity receive?
A) The half share in the house, the proceeds of the life policy, the shares, bank account and the trust fund.
B) Only the half share in the house, the proceeds of the life policy, the shares and the bank account.
C) Only the proceeds of the life policy, the shares and the bank account.
D) Only the half share in the house, the shares and the bank account.
E) Only the shares, the bank account and the trust fund.
CORRECT ANSWER B - A beneficial share in a tenancy in common passes under the deceased tenant in common’s will (contrast a beneficial joint tenancy). The life policy proceeds are part of the estate passing under the will because they were not written in trust or assigned to another. The shares and bank account were in the woman’s sole name and they pass under her will.
Option A is wrong. The trust fund is not part of the estate passing under the will. It will pass according to the terms of the father’s will trust.
Option C is wrong because it omits the share in the house which will pass under the will to the charity.
Option D is wrong because it omits the proceeds of the life policy which will pass under the will to the charity.
Option E is wrong because it omits the proceeds of the life policy which will pass under the will to the charity and wrongly includes the trust fund which passes outside the will.
A man died last week. His will, made six months ago, left his substantial estate to his niece. A solicitor drafted the man’s will on the niece’s instructions and the niece was present when the man executed the will at the solicitor’s office. The man’s daughter wants to know if she can challenge the validity of the will. The daughter says that the man was lucid and that various relatives have reported that the niece put pressure on him to make the will in her favour.
Which of the following best describes whether the daughter can challenge the validity of the man’s will?
A) The daughter has no grounds to challenge the validity of the man’s will.
B) The daughter could challenge the validity of the man’s will on the ground that he lacked testamentary capacity.
C) The daughter could challenge the validity of the man’s will on the ground that he did not know and approve the contents.
D) The daughter could challenge the validity of the man’s will but she would have to rebut the presumption of knowledge and approval.
E) The daughter could challenge the validity of the man’s will because there is a presumption of undue influence.
CORRECT ANSWER C - The facts suggest that the niece pressurised the man into making the will which casts doubt on his knowledge and approval.
Option A is therefore wrong.
Option B is wrong. The facts state that the man was lucid and therefore possessed mental capacity.
Option D is wrong. The presumption of knowledge and approval would not apply here due to the suspicious circumstances (the beneficiary brought about the preparation and execution of the will).
Option E is wrong. There is no presumption of undue influence as regards wills. The person alleging undue influence has to prove it.
A testatrix signed her will with two witnesses present. The two witnesses signed at different times. Each signed in the presence of the testatrix but not in the presence of the other witness. The will contains an attestation clause.
The executor was present throughout the execution process. The testatrix has now died.
Will the executor be able to obtain a grant of probate of the will?
A) Yes, because the executor can rely on the presumption of due execution.
B) No, because the witnesses did not sign at the same time.
C) Yes, because the executor will prove that the formalities have been complied with by providing an affidavit of due execution.
D) No, because the executor did not act as a witness.
E) No, because the witnesses did not acknowledge their signatures to each other.
CORRECT ANSWER A - The will was validly executed in accordance with s 9 Wills Act 1837. The testator signed in the presence of two witnesses as required and they each signed in the testator’s presence. The witnesses do not have to sign in each other’s presence. The attestation clause raises a presumption that the will was validly executed.
Option B is therefore wrong.
Option C is wrong. Although on the facts the executor could provide an affidavit of due execution, none is required due to the presumption of due execution raised by the attestation clause. Affidavits are required only if there is no such presumption.
Option D is wrong. The will was properly executed as explained above. There is no need for an executor to act as a witness in addition or substitution.
Option E is wrong because the original execution was valid. There was no need for the witnesses to acknowledge their signatures to each other.
A man died last week without leaving a will. His estate comprising assets in his sole name, after debts, is valued at £800,000, including £5,000 personal chattels. He was survived
by his wife, his son aged 25 years and his daughter aged 17 years. He also has two grandchildren: a granddaughter aged two years, who is the daughter of his surviving son, and a grandson aged six years. His grandson is the only child of the man’s eldest child who died six months ago.
Which of the following best explains how the estate will be distributed?
A) The man’s wife will only receive the statutory legacy of £322,000 and the personal chattels.
B) The man’s son has an interest in the estate which is contingent.
C) The man’s grandson has an interest in the estate which is contingent.
D) The man’s granddaughter has an interest in the estate which is contingent.
E) The man’s wife will only be entitled if she survives her husband by 14 days.
CORRECT ANSWER C - The deceased died intestate survived by spouse and issue, and with an estate worth more than the statutory legacy and so some of the estate passes to the issue on the statutory trusts: the son, daughter and the issue of the pre-deceased child (ie the grandson) share, contingent on reaching 18 years of age. The grandson is under 18.
Option A is wrong because the intestacy rules provide for the spouse in these circumstances to take the personal chattels plus the statutory legacy of £322,000 plus half of the remainder absolutely.
Option B is wrong as under the statutory trusts the son has reached 18 and has a vested interest.
Option D is wrong as the granddaughter will receive nothing as her father is still alive. Option E is wrong as the spouse will be entitled provided she survives by 28 days.
A woman died five weeks ago without having made a will. Her only living relatives are her civil partner and the woman’s daughter (aged 19). At the time of her death the woman’s only assets were £70,000 in a bank account in her sole name and her interest in the house she owned with her civil partner as tenants in common. The woman’s interest in the house is worth £350,000 and she had no debts.
Which of the following best describes the entitlement to the woman’s estate?
A) The woman’s civil partner is entitled to a total of £322,000 from the estate.
B) The woman’s civil partner can insist on receiving the deceased’s interest in the house in satisfaction of her entitlement provided that she pays equality money to the estate.
C) The woman’s daughter is not entitled to anything from the estate.
D) The woman’s civil partner and her daughter are each entitled to half of the estate.
E) The woman’s daughter has a contingent interest in part of the woman’s estate.
CORRECT ANSWER B - The entire estate passes under the intestacy rules. Having survived
28 days the deceased’s civil partner receives the statutory legacy of £322,000 plus half the balance (£49,000). The remaining £49,000 goes to the deceased’s daughter. The deceased’s civil partner can insist on receiving the deceased’s share of the house as part of the entitlement. However, as this is worth more than the total entitlement the civil partner will have to pay equality money to the estate.
Option A is wrong as the civil partner receives the statutory legacy of £322,000 plus half the balance (£49,000).
Option C is wrong as the estate exceeds the value of the statutory legacy for the civil partner and so the daughter will take some of the estate.
Option D is wrong as the civil partner takes a statutory legacy and the daughter takes half of what is left after this.
Option E is wrong as the daughter has satisfied the contingency in the statutory trusts of reaching 18 years of age and so her interest is vested.
A woman has recently died intestate, owning assets in her sole name worth £500,000, after debts. The woman was divorced and for the past eight years has been living with her boyfriend and his daughter (aged 12 years), by his previous relationship. Both the partner and his daughter survived the woman. The woman’s father died five years ago but the woman is survived by both her mother and her sister (aged 35).
Who is entitled to take a share of the woman’s estate?
A) The boyfriend only.
B) The boyfriend’s daughter only.
C) The sister only.
D) The mother only.
E) The mother and sister only.
CORRECT ANSWER D - Under the intestacy rules in the absence of a surviving spouse and issue the estate passes to parents. There is a surviving mother so she takes the whole estate.
Option A is wrong as the boyfriend is not a surviving spouse or civil partner and not included in the order of entitlement.
Option B is wrong as the daughter is not issue of the intestate.
Option C is wrong as the sister comes after parents in the order of entitlement and there is a surviving parent.
Option E is wrong as the rules only provide for sharing between relatives in the same category.
Erik had a life interest in a trust fund created on his father’s death in 2004. The capital value of the fund is £200,000. Under the terms of the trust the property passes to Erik’s children on his death.
TRUE OR FALSE: The value of the trust fund will form part of Erik’s estate for probate purposes.
FALSE - The trust fund passes independently of any will.
Which one or more of the following assets can be disposed of by will?
A) An interest in a house held as beneficial joint tenants.
B) The proceeds of a life policy payable to the estate.
C) An interest in a house held as beneficial tenants in common.
D) The proceeds of a life policy written in trust for the deceased’s children.
E) A lump sum payable under the deceased’s company pension scheme; the terms of the scheme allow the deceased to leave a letter of wishes as to the persons to receive the lump sum, but the trustees are not bound to follow the letter.
CORRECT ANSWERS B AND C - An interest held as beneficial tenants in common and the proceeds of a life policy payable to the estate are assets capable of passing under a will.
A is wrong because an interest held as beneficial joint tenants passes by survivorship.
D is wrong. As the policy is written in trust for the children, the proceeds will be paid direct to the children.
E is wrong because the lump sum under the pension scheme will be paid out directly by the trustees of the scheme at their discretion.
Which one of the following is a requirement under s9 Wills Act 1837?
A) The will must be in writing.
B) The witnesses must sign the will in the presence of each other.
C) The will must be dated.
D) The witnesses must read the will before they sign it.
E) The witnesses must personally know the testator.
CORRECT ANSWER A - s9 requires the will to be in writing.
B is wrong. Although under s9 it is a requirement that the witnesses sign in the presence of the testator, they do not need to sign in each other’s presence.
C is wrong because there is no requirement under s9 for the will to be dated.
D is wrong because s9 does not impose any requirement as to the witnesses reading the will. The witnesses are only witnessing the testator’s signature, they do not need to read or know the contents of the will.
E is wrong because s9 does not impose any requirement as to the identity of the witnesses. Anyone, even a stranger, can act as a witness.
Ann and Ben witness Tariq’s signature on his will. In the will Tariq gives £3,000 to Ann and £2,000 to her husband, Hari.
Which of the following statements is correct?
A) Tariq’s will is invalid because it has been witnessed by a beneficiary.
B) Tariq’s will is invalid because it has been witnessed by the spouse of a beneficiary.
C) Ann cannot take her legacy, but Hari can take his legacy.
D) Hari cannot take his legacy, but Ann can take her legacy.
E) Both Ann and Hari are unable to take their respective legacies.
CORRECT ANSWER E - A will witnessed by a beneficiary or the spouse (or civil partner) of a beneficiary remains valid (A and B are wrong) but the beneficiary loses their entitlement (s15 Wills Act 1837). Ann has acted as a witness and so she will lose her entitlement as a beneficiary (D is wrong). As Ann is Hari’s spouse, Hari will also lose his entitlement (C is wrong).
Yvette’s will appoints Himesh and Jim as her executors. The will contains a gift to Jim of £1,000 and leaves the rest of the estate to a charity. The two witnesses to the will are Yvette’s friend, Lorraine, and Himesh.
Which of the following statements is correct?
A) The will is invalid because it was witnessed by an executor.
B) The will is valid but the gift to Jim cannot take effect.
C) The will is valid and the gift to Jim can take effect.
D) The will is valid but only Jim can act as executor.
E) The will is valid but the appointment of Himesh and Jim as executors cannot take effect.
CORRECT ANSWER C - If an executor is a witness to a will it does not make the will invalid (A is wrong) and it does not prevent the executor acting. A gift can be validly made to an executor in a will (B is wrong) and the gift does not prevent the executor from acting (D and E are wrong).
TRUE OR FALSE: In order to benefit from a parent’s estate under the intestacy rules an adult child must survive their deceased parent by 28 days.
FALSE - Under the intestacy rules the 28-day survival requirement only applies to a spouse, not to the other categories of potential beneficiaries.
Ian died intestate a week ago. His wife had died some years earlier. They had three children, Abe, Bill and Charlie. Abe died last year, with two children, Dee (6) and Eve (4). Bill also died last year with two children Freddie (18) and Greg (15). Charlie is still alive and has two children Hattie (20) and Ivy (18).
Which one of the following statements about entitlement to Ian’s estate is correct?
A) Freddie and Greg each have a contingent interest.
B) Dee and Eve each have a vested interest.
C) Charlie has a contingent interest.
D) Greg has no interest.
E) Hattie and Ivy both have no interest.
CORRECT ANSWER E - Under the intestacy rules Ian’s estate passes to his issue on the statutory trusts. To take a vested interest a person must be living at the intestate’s death and reach the age of 18 (or marry or form a civil partnership earlier). Charlie has fulfilled this contingency and so he has a vested interest (C is wrong).
Abe and Bill predeceased Ian. A person who dies before the intestate leaving issue is replaced by the issue. The issue must reach 18 (or marry or form a civil partnership earlier) to take a vested interest. Bill’s son Freddie has already reached 18 and so he has a vested interest (A is wrong); Bill’s son Greg has not yet reached 18 so he has a contingent interest (D is wrong).
Similarly, Abe’s daughters, Dee and Eve, have not yet reached 18 and so they have contingent interests (B is wrong).
Hattie and Ivy have no interest because their father, Charlie, is alive and has a vested interest.
Christine was divorced from Scott many years ago. She now cohabits with Jeremy.
Christine and Jeremy have one child, Jason (aged 20).
Christine has one child, Christopher (aged 30), from her marriage to Scott.
Jeremy has one child, Daisy (22), from an earlier marriage.
Christine has just died intestate with £120,000 (plus personal chattels worth £5,000) available for distribution under the intestacy rules after payment of debts etc.
Which of the following correctly describes the distribution of Christine’s estate?
A) Jeremy is entitled to everything.
B) Jeremy, Jason and Christopher will share the estate.
C) Daisy is entitled to nothing.
D) Jason is entitled to everything.
E) Jeremy and Jason will share the estate.
CORRECT ANSWER C - Christine has died without a spouse but with two children, Jason and Christopher. Jason and Christopher are equally entitled to share her entire estate (D is wrong). A cohabitant has no entitlement under the intestacy rules, so A, B and E are wrong.
Liam died intestate. Liam never married or formed a civil partnership and had no children. Liam is survived by his parents, Gemma and Craig, by his sister, Harriet and by his two nephews, Jake and Noah. Jake is Harriet’s son. Liam’s brother, Frank, died two years before Liam. Noah is Frank’s son.
Which one or more of the following statements about the distribution of Liam’s estate is/are correct?
A) Gemma and Craig will each receive half of the estate.
B) Noah is entitled to a share of the estate in place of Frank.
C) The estate will be shared between Gemma, Craig and Harriet.
D) Jake will receive nothing from the estate.
E) Harriet will receive the entire estate.
CORRECT ANSWERS A AND D - As Liam did not have a surviving spouse it is necessary to look at the hierarchy of categories in s46 Administration of Estates Act 1925 to determine entitlement. The first category is ‘issue’, but there are none on these facts. The next category is ‘parents’. Liam was survived by both his parents and so they will share the entire estate equally between them. Relatives in a lower category (e.g. sister) have no entitlement (so, B, C and E are wrong). Gemma and Craig are equally entitled to Liam’s estate and Jake will receive noting.
