A recent case in the High Court has provided insight into the opinion of the court in relation to professional executors who refuse to renounce their executorship.
The case led to the law firm, WAG Davidson and Co., being refused permission to make further appeal against an unfavourable first-instance ruling and being ordered to pay £25,000 in legal fees.
Families are funny things, and sometimes not "ha ha" funny either. In today's society, with divorce and remarriage a common prospect for many, the state of being a second family, step-family or other familial configuration is commonplace. And while it's certainly a good thing that these family forms are no longer vilified and stigmatised as much or as often they used to be, relationships that have ended can often cause lifelong issues and disputes.
It has become something of a phenomenon in recent times; the prevalence of the inheritance dispute.
During times of economic difficulty, every penny does count and it seems that the act of inheritance is now, more than ever, a source of funds that is expected, coveted, and depended upon. But when even modest estates are wrangled over as if the parties are fighting for billions, is there an increasing duty upon the Will writer to ensure that the wishes of the testator are not going to cause a dispute? Is this possible or even ethical?
There are a number of things to consider when beginning your financial settlement on divorce; one main issue will be to understand whether a clean break settlement is appropriate or whether spousal maintenance is required.
Ideally, you and your former partner should attempt to come to an agreement in respect of the finances. If you can't agree, you will need to ask the family court to make a financial order on your behalf. If you seek a court order you will be required to undertake a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (MIAM) to see whether mediation could help you reach an agreement.
A recent High Court interim judgment appears to pour cold water on the current view that the correct test for testamentary capacity in the 21st Century should be the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) and not the 1870 case of Banks v Goodfellow.