DOCSLIB.ORG

NLJ 2020 Issue7889 June Sp

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NLJ 2020 Issue7889 June Sp www.newlawjournal.co.uk | 5 June 2020 WILLS & PROBATE LEGAL UPDATE 9 © iStockphoto/Dean Mitchell Where there’s a will; there’s a way Is it a misconception that a witness needs to be physically present at a will signing? Dr Nicholas Bevan reports IN BRIEF originated in the Law Commission’s 2017 ago and inserted by way of substitution into f The Wills Act 1837 does not require a consultation report, Making a will, which, the 1837 Act by s 17 of the Administration physical ‘presence’. at para 5.26 declares: ‘A witness must be of Justice Act 1982 (the 1982 Act). It f Live-streaming online video conferencing is mentally as well as physically present and now provides: a valid ‘presence’. therefore cannot be asleep, intoxicated or of f Video wills are here to stay. unsound mind.’ This assertion is supported ‘17 Relaxation of formal requirements for by a footnote citing Hudson v Parker [1844] 1 making wills. ife is short and we all take an Rob Eccl 1. However, as we will see from the The following section shall be substituted occasional shortcut now and then. excerpts quoted below, Hudson’s ratio does for section 9 of the Wills Act 1837— In our private lives we do not hesitate not support this proposition. Unfortunately, ‘Section 9 Signing and attestation of wills Lto rely on the trusty sat-nav instead of such is the high esteem in which the Law No will shall be valid unless— undertaking the map-reading for ourselves. Commission is rightly held, that this (a) it is in writing, and signed by the Some authors might even resort to a tired unfortunate statement has been given a testator, or by some other person in his cliché for their article’s headline! weight and authority it does not merit. presence and by his direction; and As busy professionals, most of us will In the UK, the Law Society appears to (b) it appears that the testator intended occasionally have substituted a case header have adopted this view uncritically. It has by his signature to give effect to for the judgment we know we should have been lobbying the government to introduce the will; and read. Sometimes we adopt the opinion of a emergency legislation to relax s 9’s formalities (c) the signature is made or trusted commentator, particularly when it to spare the testator and witnesses the risk of acknowledged by the testator in the is plausible. contracting the coronavirus. Elsewhere in the presence of two or more witnesses However, this kind of referential common law world, where s 9 of the 1837 Act present at the same time; and behaviour can lead us badly astray. Even the has been incorporated into national law with (d) each witness either— most esteemed institutions and authorities, little altered, several governments have been (i) attests and signs the will; or just like our sat-navs, can have a bad day. panicked into passing emergency COVID-19 (ii) acknowledges his signature, in The present controversy over whether it laws that expressly sanction the witnessing of the presence of the testator (but not is possible to execute a valid will over the wills online. necessarily in the presence of any internet using remote video technology, is a However, speaking for the UK at least, if other witness), prime example of the blind leading the blind. one reads s 9 carefully, and in the light of the There is a near uniform consensus within long line of consistent rulings interpreting it, but no form of attestation shall be the legal profession that s 9 of the Wills Act one discovers that statutory intervention is necessary.’ [emphasis added] 1837 (the 1837 Act) does not permit the not required. execution of wills online and that legislation The words used here to prescribe the is required to address this shortcoming. The statutory provisions: ancient & simultaneous ‘presence’ of the testator Both views are misconceived because they modern and the witnesses are, in all material are based on an assumption that is a non Parliament has regulated will writing for respects, identical in both the 1837 and 1982 sequitur. They both assume (mistakenly) at least 343 years. Section 5 of the Statute versions of s 9. that s 9 requires the testamentary witnesses of Frauds 1677 introduced the progenitor to be physically present when a will is either of what is now s 9 of the 1837 Act and the Prevention of fraud signed or acknowledged by the testator; requirement that the testator’s signature In Re Fuld deceased (No 3) [1968] P 675, [1965] when it clearly does not. should be made or acknowledged in the 3 All ER 776 Mr Justice Scarman observed of ‘presence’ of witnesses. s 9 that the legal requirement is a safeguard in Law Commission report The most recent iteration is something of will cases ‘against fraud upon the dead’. This misconception appears to have a cuckoo. It was introduced only 38 years This is why s 9 of the 1837 Act insists 10 LEGAL UPDATE WILLS & PROBATE 5 June 2020 | www.newlawjournal.co.uk upon the strict adherence to its formalities. examination of what is meant by ‘presence’. Loquendumestutvulgus, says Lord Coke These are set as a prerequisite of validity Given the Law Commission’s misattribution (4 Eep. 47). If in the course of common and no deviation is tolerated. and the intrinsic clarity of his statement, it conversation a person wishes to support the is worth reviewing this in some detail here. truth of a statement, does he not say—“Such Broadly termed but not ambiguous In Hudson the testator acknowledged a a one was present, and he will vouch for the For all its strictly prescribed formalities, s document in his possession as his will, in the truth?” if a statement be questioned, does 9 does not specify the means by which the physical presence of two witnesses, whom not a person say, “I was present and can testamentary witnesses should manifest he then invited to sign as witnesses, without attest its correctness,” and does not the their simultaneous ‘presence’, any more allowing them to see any of the writing, whole world understand by this, mental, than it prescribes the nature of the ‘writing’ including his own signature. not bodily, presence? Would not a or what type of document should be used. Sir Jenner-Fust held that the will did contrary construction lead to absurdity, The policy enabled the 19th Century version not conform with s 9 of the Act, because, and defeat the plain intention of the of s 9 to accommodate a wide range of in his words: ‘how is it possible that the statute?’ [emphasis added] technical innovations over the 148 years witnesses should swear that any signature that span 1837 and 1982. was acknowledged unless they saw it?’ In In Re Killick’s Goods [1864] 3 Sw&Tr For example, it is clear from the incidental explaining his decision he said: 578) Sir J P Wild offered the following references to lithographed wills in Manning observations: ‘Great latitude ought to be given v Purcell (1855) 7 De G M & G 55 and In the ‘The words of which we now wish to the meaning of the word “presence” used in Goods of Wotton [1874-80] All ER Rep 240 to understand the meaning are the the 9th section of the Wills Act, … I think such that pre-printed wills were accepted by the following:—“Such signature shall be an act as this cannot be said to be done by one courts as valid from the mid-nineteenth made or acknowledged by the testator person in the presence of another, unless at century, at least. in the presence of two or more witnesses the time each is aware of the other’s presence.’ It is also very unlikely that the concept of a present at the same time”. .... Accordingly s 9’s use of ‘presence’ has a typewritten will would have been envisaged strictly functional meaning in just the same by the Parliamentary draftsmen in 1837 but way that ‘writing’ has within the same it is within living memory that pre-printed Given that video provision. and typewritten wills were in ubiquitous and evidence can be unchallenged use long before the 1982 Act. “ Common usage & common sense Similarly, no one appears to have questioned now be adduced If a valid will can be written on an eggshell the widespread use of word processed wills Re Barnes Goods, Hodson v Barnes (1926) 43 from the mid to late 1970s onwards. Yet, from in criminal & civil TLR 71 or scribbled in bad Ukrainian on a a literal perspective, printing, typing and trials it seems oddly bedroom wall Re Slavinskyj’s Estate (1989) word processing are not what ordinary people 53 SASR 221, and if an unlettered mark Re would consider to be ‘writing’. anachronistic to Kieran [1933] IR 222 can be accepted as a trenchantly insist valid signature, then it is unclear what legal The literal meaning of ‘presence’ principle or rationale prevents testamentary The Oxford English Dictionary offers that this 1982 Act witnesses from manifesting their virtual several definitions of ‘presence’. The most requires nothing less ‘presence’ online using live-streamed video obvious candidate, in this context, has a technology, provided, of course, this is topographical connotation: ‘of being in the than a close physical undertaken in a manner that is consistent with place in question.’ The modern 1982 version attendance” s 9, the case law and its legislative objective. of s 9, in keeping with its predecessors, Given that video evidence can be now be does not specify whether a remote or close adduced in criminal and civil trials it seems presence is required.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shattering and Moving Beyond the Gutenberg Paradigm: the Dawn of the Electronic Will
    University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Volume 42 2008 Shattering and Moving Beyond the Gutenberg Paradigm: The Dawn of the Electronic Will Joseph Karl Grant Capital University Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr Part of the Estates and Trusts Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Joseph K. Grant, Shattering and Moving Beyond the Gutenberg Paradigm: The Dawn of the Electronic Will, 42 U. MICH. J. L. REFORM 105 (2008). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr/vol42/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SHATTERING AND MOVING BEYOND THE GUTENBERG PARADIGM: THE DAWN OF THE ELECTRONIC WILL Joseph Karl Grant* INTRODUCTION Picture yourself watching a movie. In the film, a group of four siblings are dressed in dark suits and dresses. The siblings, Bill Jones, Robert Jones, Margaret Jones and Sally Johnson, have just returned from their elderly mother's funeral. They sit quietly in their mother's attorney's office intently watching and listening to a videotape their mother, Ms. Vivian Jones, made before her death. On the videotape, Ms. Jones expresses her last will and testament. Ms. Jones clearly states that she would like her sizable real estate holdings to be divided equally among her four children and her valuable blue-chip stock investments to be used to pay for her grandchildren's education.
    [Show full text]
  • Case and ~C®Mment
    251 CASE AND ~C®MMENT. CROWN -SERVANT- INCORPORATION -IMMUNITY FROM BEING SUED. The recent case of Gilleghan v. Minister of Healthl decided by Farwell, J., is a decision on the questions : Will an action lie against a Minister-of the Crown in respect of an act admittedly done as a Minister of the Crown? Or -is the true view that the only remedy is against the Crown by petition of right? Does the mere incorporation. of a servant of the Crown confer the privilege of suing and the liability to be sued? The rationale for the general rule that a servant of the Crown cannot be sued in his official capacity is that the servant holds no assets in his official capacity which can be seized in satisfaction of a judgment. He holds only on behalf of the Crown.2 Collins, M.R., in Bainbridge v. Postmaster-General3 said : "The revenue of the country cannot be reached by an action against an official, unless there is some provision to be found in the legisla~ tion to enable this to be done." In the Gilleghan case the defendant moved to-strike out the statement of claim. The Minister of Health was established by the Ministry of Health Act- which provided, inter alia, that the Minister "may sue and be sued in the name of the Minister of Health" and that "for the purpose of acquiring and holding land" the Minister for the time being "shall be a corporation sole." Farwell, J ., decided that the provision that the Minister may sue and be sued does not give the plaintiff a cause of action for breach of contract against the Minister.
    [Show full text]
  • The Decline of Revocation by Physical Act
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 2019 The Decline of Revocation by Physical Act Barry Cushman Notre Dame Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship Part of the Estates and Trusts Commons, and the Insurance Law Commons Recommended Citation Barry Cushman, The Decline of Revocation by Physical Act, 54 Real Prop., Tr. & Est. L.J. 243 (2019). Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1416 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE DECLINE OF REVOCATION BY PHYSICAL ACT Barry Cushman* Author's Synopsis: The power to revoke one's will by physical act was enshrined in Anglo-American law in 1677 by the Statute of Frauds. It remains the law in Great Britain, in such developed Commonwealth countries as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and in each state of the United States ofAmerica. Yet the revocation of wills by physical act has become badly out of phase with the law governing nonprobate transfers, which as a general matter requires that an instrument of transfer be revoked only by a writing signed by the transferor. This Article surveys the place of revocation by physical act in the law governing will substitutes, such as payable-on-death designations on bank accounts, transfer-on-deathdesignations on brokerage accounts, life insurance and annuities, beneficiary deeds, and revocable trusts.
    [Show full text]
  • Failure of Gifts by Will
    Failure of Gifts by Will This month’s CPD will examine the many reasons why a gift made by Will may fail. This paper will look at the most common reasons for the failure of gifts, listed below, but practitioner’s should be aware that this list is non-exhaustive and gifts may fail for other reasons; including a contingency for a gift not being met, as a matter of public policy, or even because a condition attached to a gift is void. MAIN REASONS A GIFT MAY FAIL A gift may fail for one of the following main reasons: The beneficiary or a spouse or civil partner of the beneficiary is an attesting witness The divorce or dissolution of a marriage or civil partnership between the testator and the beneficiary Lapse Ademption Abatement Uncertainty The beneficiary is guilty of the unlawful killing of the testator The beneficiary disclaims their gift BENEFICIARY OR THEIR SPOUSE IS AN ATTESTING WITNESS This is the most well-known reason for the failure of a gift. Section 15 of the Wills Act 1837 deprives an attesting witness and their spouse or civil partner from receiving any benefit under the Will which they attest. If a beneficiary or their spouse is an attesting witness the attestation itself will be valid and this will not cause the Will to fail; only the gift to the witness or their spouse shall be void. There are some key exceptions to this general rule: If a beneficiary was not married to the witness at the time the attestation took place but married the witness afterwards then they will not be deprived of their benefit.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Will Drafting for Accountants
    Introduction to Will Drafting for Accountants MONDAY, 25 MARCH 2019 In association with… icaew.com The value of ICAEW membership Qualified professionals to advise you on technical and 1 ethical matters 259 World class Industry and library ... country guides ... with Connecting information ACA/FCA members through and research online professionals communities, offering blogs and forums tailored help Internationally recognised designatory letters Member App available on Android and iOS INTELLIGENCE AND INSIGHT APRIL 2015 | ICAEW.COM/ECONOMIA ISSUE 37 | ACCOUNTANCY | FINANCE | BUSINESS 200+ Confidential Fight for and non- your right Specialist technical Multimillionaire barrow boy Barry Hearn on fortune, family and making his own way helpsheets and judgmental PRIVATE EQUITY THE PENSIONS REVOLUTION EUROPEAN support and ROAD TRIPS FAQs advice 18 International member groups 3,450+ 24h electronic 24 10 journals UK District International Societies offices and books Information online when you need it – no cost, no time zone, no delay Agenda Time Session 09:00 Registration 09:30 Formal requirement for wills; When to use life interest trusts; When to use discretionary trusts; Taking instructions for a will – who is the client?, family, size of estate, who does the client wish to benefit; Capacity to make a will and knowledge and approval of the contents; Undue influence: Conflict of interest – couples may have different wishes; Does client have an equitable interest in a house vested in the name of someone else? Does someone else have an equitable
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey, Analysis, and Evaluation of Holographic Will Statutes Kevin R
    Hofstra Law Review Volume 17 | Issue 1 Article 5 1988 A Survey, Analysis, and Evaluation of Holographic Will Statutes Kevin R. Natale Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Natale, Kevin R. (1988) "A Survey, Analysis, and Evaluation of Holographic Will Statutes," Hofstra Law Review: Vol. 17: Iss. 1, Article 5. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol17/iss1/5 This document is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Natale: A Survey, Analysis, and Evaluation of Holographic Will Statutes NOTES A SURVEY, ANALYSIS, AND EVALUATION OF HOLOGRAPHIC WILL STATUTES I. INTRODUCTION Traditionally, a holographic will' has been deemed valid when it is "entirely written, dated, and signed" in the handwriting of the testator.2 While modern statutory provisions 3 may vary,4 one central feature remains constant-no attesting witnesses are required for valid execution.5 Thus, the formalities of attestation,' which serve important ritualistic, evidentiary, and protective functions,7 are not 1. Some jurisdictions utilize the term "olographic" will. See, e.g., LA. Civ. CODE ANN. art. 1588 (West 1952 & Supp. 1986) (providing for "olographic" testaments); S.D. CODMEt LAWS ANN. § 29-2-8 (1984) (providing for "olographic" wills). 2. See Dean v. Dickey, 225 S.W.2d 999, 1000 (Tex. Civ. App. 1949) (stating the an- cient rule that "a will should be valid if entirely 'written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator.'" (quoting Iz re Dreyfus' Estate, 175 Cal.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1837 Wills Act
    The 1837 Wills Act: This month we will be having a detailed look at several sections from the Wills Act 1837. As will writers are aware the 1837 Wills Act (WA1837), as amended, supplies the detailed background legislation that must be followed whenever a will is drafted. The actual text of the Wills Act is provided along with the current amendments and commentary as to the meaning and effect of the statute. By the addition of the full text of the WA1837 will writers have the opportunity to read the actual words of this vital legislation governing the way in which wills are validly conceived, drafted, interpreted and executed. You should read the statutory WA1837 text extracted and the associated notes carefully and then answer the usual 15 CPD questions. Sections that are not mentioned below have been previously repealed. Section 1: [1.] Meaning of certain words in this Act: “Will”: “Real estate”: “Personal estate”: Number: Gender. The words and expressions herein-after mentioned, which in their ordinary signification have a more confined or a different meaning, shall in this Act, except where the nature of the provision or the context of the Act shall exclude such construction, be interpreted as follows; (that is to say,) the word “will” shall extend to a testament, and to a codicil, and to an appointment by will or by writing in the nature of a will in exercise of a power, [F1and also to an appointment by will of a guardian of a child,][F2and also to an appointment by will of a representative under section 4 of the Human Tissue Act 2004,] .
    [Show full text]
  • Wills Law on the Ground David Horton
    Wills Law on the Ground David Horton EVIEW R ABSTRACT Traditional wills doctrine was notorious for its formalism. Courts insisted that testators LA LAW LA LAW strictly comply with the Wills Act and refused to consider extrinsic evidence to construe UC instruments. Yet the 1990 Uniform Probate Code revisions and the Restatement (Third) of Property: Wills and Donative Transfers replaced these venerable bright-line rules with fact-sensitive standards in an effort to foster individualized justice. Although some judges, scholars, and lawmakers welcomed this seismic shift, others objected that inflexible principles provide clarity and deter litigation. But with little hard evidence about the operation of probate court, the frequency of disputes, and decedents’ preferences, these factions have battled to a stalemate. This Article casts fresh light on this debate by reporting the results of a study of every probate matter stemming from deaths during the course of a year in a major California county. This original dataset of 571 estates reveals how wills law plays out on the ground. The Article uses these insights to analyze the issues that divide the formalists and the functionalists, such as the requirement that wills be witnessed, holographic wills, the harmless error rule, the ademption by extinction doctrine, and the antilapse doctrine. AUTHOR Professor of Law, University of California, Davis, School of Law (King Hall). Thanks to Mark L. Ascher, Stephen Clowney, Robert H. Sitkoff and Reid Kress Weisbord for helpful comments. 62 UCLA L. REV. 1094 (2015) TaBLE OF CONTENTS Introduction...........................................................................................................1096 I. Formalism and Functionalism in Wills Law ..........................................1104 A. Traditional Law and Formalism ..............................................................1104 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Wills Act 1837 (UK) Imperial Act 26 Date of Assent 3 July 1837
    Wills Act 1837 (UK) Imperial Act 26 Date of assent 3 July 1837 Contents Page Title 2 1 Interpretation 2 3 All property may be disposed of by will 3 6 Devolution of estates pur autre vie not disposed of by will 4 9 Formal requirements of will 5 10 Execution and validity of appointments by will 5 13 Publication of will not requisite 6 14 Will not to be void on account of incompetency of 6 attesting witness 15 Gifts to an attesting witness, or his or her wife, husband, 6 civil union partner, or de facto partner, to be void 16 Creditor attesting a will charging estate with debts to be 7 admitted a witness 17 Executor to be admitted a witness 7 18 Revocation of wills by marriage 7 19 No will to be revoked by presumption from altered 8 circumstances 20 Manner of revocation of will 8 21 Alteration in a will after execution, except in certain cases, 8 to have no effect unless executed as a will 22 Revoked will not to be revived otherwise than by 8 re­execution or a codicil 23 Subsequent conveyance or other act not to prevent 9 operation of will 24 Wills to be construed to speak from death of testator 9 25 Residuary devises to include estates comprised in lapsed 9 and void devises 26 General devise of land to include copyhold and leasehold 9 as well as freehold land 27 General gift of realty or personalty to include property 10 over which testator has a general power of appointment Note This Act is administered as to New Zealand by the Ministry of Justice 1 Reprinted as at Wills Act 1837 (UK) 3 September 2007 28 Devise of real estate without any
    [Show full text]
  • 1988 No 112 Imperial Laws Application
    1988, No. 112 Imperial Laws Application 1021 ANALYSIS 4. Other Imperial enactments and Imperial subordinate legislation not part of laws of New Zealand Title 5. Application of common law of England 1. Short Title and commencement 6. Power to make subordinate legislation 2. InteTretation under Imperial enactments part of 3. Application of Imperial enactments and laws of New Zealand Imperial subordinate legislation as 7. Repeal part of laws of New Zealand Scliedules 1988, No. 112 An Act to specify the extent to which Imperial enactments, Imperial subordinate legislation, and the common law of England are part of the laws of New Zealand [28 July 1988 BE IT ENACTED by the Parliament of New Zealand as follows: I. Short Tide and commencement-(1) This Act may be cited as the Imperial Laws Application Act 1988. : (2) This Act shall come into force on the 1st day of January 1989. 2. Interpretation-In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- "Imperial enactment" means any Act of the Parliament of England, or of the Parliament of Great Britain, or of the Parliament of the United Kingdom; but does not include any Imperial subordinate legislation: "Imperial subordinate legislation" means any Order in Council, regulation, or other legislative instrument made under any Imperial enactment; and includes the Letters Patent listed in the Second Schedule to this Act. 1022 Imperial Laws Application 1988, No. 112 8. Application of Imperial enactrnents and Imperial subordinate legislation as part of laws of New Zealand- (1) The Imperial enactments listed in the First Schedule to this Act, and the Imperial subordinate legislation listed in the Second Schedule to this Act, are hereby declared to be part of the laws of New Zealand.
    [Show full text]
  • Wills Act 1837 Is up to Date with All Changes Known to Be in Force on Or Before 09 August 2021
    Status: Point in time view as at 01/12/2015. Changes to legislation: Wills Act 1837 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 09 August 2021. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) Wills Act 1837 1837 CHAPTER 26 7 Will 4 and 1 Vict An Act for the amendment of the laws with respect to Wills. [3rd July 1837] Textual Amendments F1 Act (except s. 1 in part and s. 11) repealed (N.I.) (1.1.1995) by S.I. 1994/1899 (N.I. 13), art. 38, Sch. 3 (with art. 36, Sch. 2 para. 15(1)-(3)); S.R. 1994/372, art. 2 Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 Short Title “The Wills Act 1837” given by Short Titles Act 1896 (c. 14) C2 Act amended by Law of Property (Amendment) Act 1924 (15 & 16 Geo. 5 c. 5), s. 9, Sch. 9 C3 Words of enactment and other words repealed by Statute Law Revision (No. 2) Act 1888 (c. 57) and Statute Law Revision Act 1893 (c. 14) C4 This Act is not necessarily in the form in which it has effect in Northern Ireland C5 Act modified by Mental Health Act 1983 (c. 20, SIF 85), ss. 97(2), 148, Sch. 5 para. 43(2) C6 Act amended by the Children Act 1989 (c. 41, SIF 20), s. 108(6), Sch. 14 para.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing Times for Attestation Brian Sloan* Section 9 of the Wills Act
    Testing Times for Attestation Brian Sloan* Section 9 of the Wills Act 1837 requires a will valid in English Law to be in writing and signed by the testator (or someone else at his direction)1 in circumstances where the signature was intended to give effect to the will.2 The signature must be made or acknowledged in the presence of at least two witnesses,3 and the witnesses must either “attest[ ] and sign” the will or acknowledge their signatures in the testator’s presence.4 The Act expressly provides, however, that “no form of attestation shall be necessary”.5 In its recent Consultation Paper on Making A Will, the Law Commission asserted that: “[i]f ‘attestation’ does not require anything more than the witnesses being present and bearing witness to the testator’s signature (or his…acknowledgement of the signature) then the requirement for the witness to ‘attest’ appears redundant”,6 and provisionally proposed its removal.7 Even if the requirement is retained, the Commission suggested that the difficult notion of attestation “be defined to mean that the witness must sign the will and intend that his or her signature serve as clear evidence of the authenticity of the testator’s signature” and apply even where the witnesses have acknowledged their signatures.8 Meanwhile, the requirement to attest and sign remains in force, and in its 2018 judgment in Payne v Payne, the Court of Appeal had to consider circumstances in which it was alleged that the witnessing of a will was invalid.9 In light of Payne and other case law, this note will assess the desirability of abolition or reform of attestation, as suggested by the Law Commission.
    [Show full text]