Will Validity: Formal Requirements Flashcards
Which of the following is a requirement for a valid will under s.9 Wills Act 1837?
A) The will must be signed by at least three witnesses.
B) The will must be handwritten by the testator.
C) The will must be in writing and signed by the testator or someone at their direction.
D) The will must be signed in secret to maintain confidentiality.
C) The will must be in writing and signed by the testator or someone at their direction.
Explanation:
Section 9 Wills Act 1837 requires that a will be in writing, signed by the testator (or someone at their direction), and properly witnessed. There is no requirement for three witnesses (two are sufficient), and a will does not need to be handwritten.
What happens if a beneficiary of a will also acts as a witness?
A) The will becomes invalid.
B) The witness can still inherit as long as there is a valid attestation clause.
C) The beneficiary’s gift is void, but the will remains valid.
D) The witness must sign a separate affidavit confirming they will not claim under the will.
C) The beneficiary’s gift is void, but the will remains valid.
Explanation:
Under s.15 Wills Act 1837, if a beneficiary (or their spouse/civil partner) witnesses a will, their gift is void. However, the will itself remains valid.
A testator, James, is physically unable to sign his will. He asks his brother to sign on his behalf in the presence of two witnesses. Which of the following is correct?
A) The will is invalid because the testator must sign personally.
B) The will is invalid unless a doctor confirms James’s incapacity.
C) The will is valid if James directs his brother to sign and it is properly witnessed.
D) The will is only valid if James makes an oral declaration of his wishes.
C) The will is valid if James directs his brother to sign and it is properly witnessed.
Explanation:
Under s.9 Wills Act 1837, a will is valid if it is signed by someone at the testator’s direction, as long as it is properly witnessed. No medical confirmation or oral declaration is needed.
Sarah signs her will in front of two witnesses. She later realises she forgot to include a clause and adds it in her handwriting before the witnesses sign. Which of the following is correct?
A) The will is valid because the amendment was made before the witnesses signed.
B) The amendment is invalid unless Sarah re-signs in front of new witnesses.
C) The entire will is invalid because it has been altered after being signed.
D) The will is valid, but the handwritten amendment is ignored unless a codicil is made.
D) The will is valid, but the handwritten amendment is ignored unless a codicil is made.
Explanation:
Once a will is signed and witnessed, any handwritten amendments must be properly attested (usually by a codicil). Otherwise, they are ignored but the original will remains valid.
Michael is in hospital and wishes to make a will. He is unable to physically sign due to illness. A nurse writes his will and reads it to him. Michael confirms it reflects his wishes and asks the nurse to sign on his behalf in front of two witnesses. The witnesses sign in Michael’s presence. What is the legal status of the will?
A) The will is invalid because the testator did not sign personally.
B) The will is valid if Michael directed the nurse to sign on his behalf.
C) The will is invalid unless a solicitor confirms Michael’s wishes.
D) The will is only valid if a medical practitioner signs it as well.
B) The will is valid if Michael directed the nurse to sign on his behalf.
Explanation:
Under s.9 Wills Act 1837, a will is valid if it is signed on behalf of the testator at their direction, as long as there are two witnesses present at the time. No solicitor or medical professional is required.
A testator, David, is blind and executes his will by signing it with an “X.” His solicitor reads the will aloud to him before he signs in the presence of two witnesses. The witnesses sign without making any additional notes. A dispute arises after David’s death. What is the most likely issue?
A) The will is invalid because a blind person cannot make a will.
B) The will is invalid because David did not know its contents.
C) The will may be challenged because the attestation clause does not confirm it was read to him.
D) The will is valid because an “X” is sufficient as a signature.
C) The will may be challenged because the attestation clause does not confirm it was read to him.
Explanation:
For a blind testator, an attestation clause should confirm that the will was read aloud and understood. While an “X” can be a valid signature, a lack of proper attestation may lead to challenges over knowledge and approval.
What is the minimum number of witnesses required for a valid will under s.9 Wills Act 1837?
A) Two
B) One
C) Three
D) No witnesses are required
A) Two
Explanation:
Under s.9 Wills Act 1837, a will must be signed in the presence of two witnesses, who must also sign in the testator’s presence.
Which of the following best describes the function of an attestation clause in a will?
A) It confirms the testator’s testamentary capacity.
B) It explains the execution process and raises a presumption of due execution.
C) It ensures the testator’s identity is verified.
D) It legally binds the witnesses to confidentiality.
B) It explains the execution process and raises a presumption of due execution.
Explanation:
An attestation clause provides a record of how the will was executed and raises a presumption of due execution, meaning the court assumes it was properly signed and witnessed unless evidence suggests otherwise.
Emma prepares a will but signs it before the witnesses arrive. She then acknowledges her signature when they arrive, and both witnesses sign in her presence. Is the will valid?
A) No, because the witnesses did not see her sign.
B) No, because the witnesses must sign in each other’s presence.
C) Yes, because the testator acknowledged her signature before the witnesses.
D) Yes, but only if the testator writes a new attestation clause.
C) Yes, because the testator acknowledged her signature before the witnesses.
Explanation:
Under s.9 Wills Act 1837, a testator may either sign in front of the witnesses or acknowledge a prior signature in their presence. The witnesses must then sign in the testator’s presence, but not necessarily in front of each other.
A testator, John, makes a will in which he leaves his entire estate to his daughter, who also signs as a witness. His son later challenges the will. What is the likely legal consequence?
A) The will is invalid.
B) The gift to the daughter is void, but the rest of the will remains valid.
C) The entire will is valid, including the daughter’s inheritance.
D) The daughter can still inherit if both witnesses submit sworn statements confirming due execution.
B) The gift to the daughter is void, but the rest of the will remains valid.
Explanation:
Under s.15 Wills Act 1837, if a beneficiary (or their spouse) witnesses the will, their gift is void, but the will itself remains valid.
