Will Validity: Capacity Flashcards
What is the minimum age required to make a valid will under the Wills Act 1837?
A) 16
B) 18
C) 21
D) 25
B) 18
Explanation:
Under Section 7 of the Wills Act 1837, a person must be at least 18 years old to make a valid will, unless they are in military service or a mariner at sea, in which case exceptions apply.
Which of the following is NOT a requirement for testamentary capacity under Banks v Goodfellow?
A) The testator must know the exact value of every asset they own.
B) The testator must understand the nature of making a will and its effects.
C) The testator must be aware of the people who may have moral claims to their estate.
D) The testator must not suffer from any disorder of the mind that affects their will-making decision.
A) The testator must know the exact value of every asset they own.
Explanation:
The testator must have a general understanding of their estate’s extent but does not need to know precise values of all assets
Which of the following statements about the “Golden Rule” is correct?
A) It is a legally binding rule that must always be followed.
B) It applies only when a will is being challenged in court.
C) It is a best practice requiring a medical assessment when making a will for elderly or ill clients.
D) It allows family members to override the testator’s will if they believe it is unfair.
C) It is a best practice requiring a medical assessment when making a will for elderly or ill clients.
Explanation:
The Golden Rule (from Kenward v Adams) is a best practice (not a legal requirement) stating that if a testator is elderly or seriously ill, a medical practitioner should assess their capacity to reduce the risk of disputes.
Under Parker v Felgate, when can a testator who lacks capacity at the time of signing still make a valid will?
A) If they had testamentary capacity when giving instructions, the will was prepared in accordance with those instructions, and they understood they were signing a will.
B) If they had a lawyer present during the signing, even if they did not understand the contents of the will.
C) If they regained testamentary capacity at any point before death.
D) If their family members confirmed their intentions.
A) If they had testamentary capacity when giving instructions, the will was prepared in accordance with those instructions, and they understood they were signing a will.
Explanation:
Parker v Felgate allows a testator who lacks capacity at signing to make a valid will if they had capacity when giving instructions, the will was prepared accordingly, and at signing, they understood what they were doing.
A testator with dementia has ‘lucid days’ where they can think clearly. Which statement is correct?
A) The testator can never make a valid will once diagnosed with dementia.
B) The testator can only make a will if a doctor is present at signing.
C) The testator may be able to make a valid will if they execute it on a lucid day.
D) The testator’s family must approve the will for it to be valid.
C) The testator may be able to make a valid will if they execute it on a lucid day.
Explanation:
Capacity can fluctuate (Key v Key). A person with dementia can still make a valid will if they sign it during a lucid interval when they meet the Banks v Goodfellow test.
A testator leaves everything to their new partner and excludes their children. The will is rational and properly executed. What must the children prove to challenge the will on grounds of lack of capacity?
A) That they were financially dependent on the testator.
B) That the testator had a diagnosed mental illness.
C) That the testator was coerced into making the will.
D) That the testator lacked understanding of the nature and effect of the will.
D) That the testator lacked understanding of the nature and effect of the will.
Explanation:
To challenge capacity, they must prove that the testator did not understand the will’s effect, their assets, or who should benefit (Banks v Goodfellow). A mental illness alone is not enough.
A solicitor drafts a will for an elderly client. The solicitor does not arrange for a medical assessment. The will is later challenged on capacity grounds. What is the likely consequence?
A) The court will automatically declare the will invalid.
B) The solicitor may be accused of professional negligence if the testator’s capacity was in doubt.
C) The court will require the beneficiaries to prove the will is valid.
D) The will can only be valid if the testator’s family confirms they had capacity.
B) The solicitor may be accused of professional negligence if the testator’s capacity was in doubt.
Explanation:
Following the Golden Rule, a solicitor should arrange a medical assessment when there is doubt about capacity. Failing to do so could result in a negligence claim (Wharton v Bancroft).
A testator suffered from severe paranoia and believed their spouse was an enemy agent. Their will left everything to a distant cousin and excluded the spouse. The spouse challenges the will. What is the strongest legal argument?
A) The testator’s belief was an insane delusion affecting the terms of the will.
B) The will was not properly witnessed.
C) The will does not comply with the Wills Act 1837.
D) The testator had a duty to provide for the spouse.
A) The testator’s belief was an insane delusion affecting the terms of the will.
Explanation:
A testator lacks capacity if they suffer from an insane delusion that affects their will-making decision (Banks v Goodfellow). Believing a spouse is an enemy agent is irrational and likely affected the will’s terms.
A testator, aged 90, suffers from intermittent confusion but has moments of full clarity. Their solicitor arranges a medical assessment on a ‘bad day,’ where the testator appears confused. However, the testator executes their will on a ‘good day,’ understanding their estate and beneficiaries. What is the legal position?
A) The will is automatically invalid because the medical report suggests confusion.
B) The will is valid if the testator had testamentary capacity at the time of signing.
C) The will is invalid unless the testator’s family confirms it reflects their true wishes.
D) The will is valid only if a second medical report confirms capacity on the signing day.
B) The will is valid if the testator had testamentary capacity at the time of signing.
Explanation:
Capacity can fluctuate (Key v Key). A medical report is not conclusive—what matters is whether the testator had capacity at the time of execution. If they understood the nature of the will, their assets, and beneficiaries, the will is valid.
A testator made a will while suffering from bipolar disorder. On the day of signing, they were experiencing a manic episode and disposed of their entire estate to a newly met acquaintance, excluding their long-time partner and children. The partner challenges the will. What is the strongest argument?
A) The will is invalid because bipolar disorder automatically prevents testamentary capacity.
B) The will is invalid because the acquaintance unduly influenced the testator.
C) The will is valid because the testator was an adult with full decision-making autonomy.
D) The testator lacked testamentary capacity as their disorder affected their judgment.
D) The testator lacked testamentary capacity as their disorder affected their judgment.
Explanation:
A mental illness alone does not invalidate a will. However, if a disorder affects judgment and the testator cannot meet the Banks v Goodfellow test, the will may be invalid. A manic episode may impair the testator’s reasoning about moral claims and the effects of their decisions.
