Understanding and managing disagreements over testamentary documents can be complex, particularly when concerns about the mental capacity of the person who made the will come into play. These disputes often involve sensitive family dynamics, emotionally charged backgrounds, and difficult legal questions. Mental capacity challenges typically arise after the passing of a loved one, adding to existing grief and division. To navigate these circumstances effectively, it is essential for those involved to understand the legal principles, medical considerations, evidentiary requirements, and resolution options available.
The challenge of such disputes is twofold: first, establishing or disproving the testamentary capacity of the testator at the time the will was made; and second, managing the procedural and emotional fallout that follows. This article explores the foundations of these disagreements, the relevant legal landscape, the role of medical evidence, and the steps available to resolve the conflict with dignity and fairness.
In English and Welsh law, the key principles relating to testamentary capacity were set out in the 1870 case of Banks v Goodfellow. This remains the cornerstone legal test over 150 years later. It establishes that in order to create a valid will, the testator must:
1. Understand the nature and effect of making a will.
2. Know the extent of the property they are disposing of.
3. Understand and appreciate the claims to which they ought to give effect (i.e., understand who might expect to benefit from the will).
4. Not be affected by any disorder of the mind that influences their dispositions in the will.
These four criteria form the basis upon which capacity will be assessed. Importantly, capacity is a legal concept, not merely a medical one. A diagnosis of dementia or another cognitive impairment does not necessarily mean a person lacks testamentary capacity. The focus is on the testator’s abilities at the specific point in time the will was executed.
Since will disputes often arise posthumously, proving or contesting mental capacity becomes a uniquely retrospective exercise. The courts must effectively answer whether the testator met the legal test of capacity on the specific date they executed their will. This assessment often relies on a complex mosaic of documentary evidence, witness testimony, and expert opinion.
Medical records from the period leading up to the execution of the will can be critical. These may include GP notes, specialist assessments, hospital records, and any evidence of cognitive testing. Where testamentary capacity is called into question based on events that occurred years ago, the reliability and detail of medical documentation can significantly influence a court’s findings.
Alongside this, witness evidence plays a key role. Solicitors, friends, carers, family members, and others who interacted with the testator can provide crucial context. A solicitor who oversaw the making of the will may have made extensive records attesting to the client’s apparent understanding and decision-making ability, following what is known as the Golden Rule.
Legal practitioners are expected to follow professional guidance when preparing wills for elderly or potentially vulnerable clients. The Golden Rule, not a legal requirement but considered best practice, advises solicitors drafting a will for someone who is unwell or aged to obtain a contemporaneous medical opinion confirming the testator’s capacity.
This precaution does not guarantee immunity from future disputes, but it significantly strengthens a defence against claims of incapacity. A properly documented will-drafting process, supported by an independent medical assessment, may offer persuasive evidence to the court if contested.
Solicitors should also keep detailed file notes and use capacity questionnaires or worksheets to demonstrate that they followed appropriate steps. However, not all wills are prepared by legal professionals – homemade wills or those drafted without professional input are particularly susceptible to scrutiny.
Claims relating to mental capacity typically arise under one or more of the following scenarios:
1. A new will departs significantly from a previous version with no clear rationale. If the previous will favoured all the children equally, but a later will leaves everything to one, alarm bells may ring.
2. A will is made shortly after a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s or another degenerative condition. The timing can give rise to suspicion, especially if combined with physical frailty or dependence on others.
3. The testator was heavily reliant on one individual – often the main beneficiary. Evidence that the testator was isolated or had limited contact with others may suggest undue influence or reduced capacity.
4. Lack of independent legal advice. Homemade wills, or those drafted under the guidance of a beneficiary, naturally face more scrutiny due to the higher risk of coercion or confusion.
It is crucial to understand that mental capacity may fluctuate. Someone might lack capacity on one day but retain it the next – particularly in cases of mild cognitive impairment or early-stage dementia. This makes precise dating of the will and corresponding evidence even more important.
In mental capacity disputes, expert psychiatric or geriatric evidence may be necessary to assist the court in assessing the testator’s cognitive ability at the date of the will’s execution. Experts are typically instructed to review available records and provide a retrospective assessment of capacity based on recognised diagnostic tools and the Banks v Goodfellow test.
However, medical evidence is rarely conclusive on its own. The courts evaluate all the circumstances – medical, factual, legal, and personal. An expert may opine that the testator was likely experiencing memory issues, but unless this impacted their ability to understand the relevant components of a will, the legal threshold for capacity may still have been met.
Instructions to experts must be carefully structured. The court will reject poorly drafted or speculative reports. Parties should consider jointly instructing a single expert when appropriate, to reduce the risk of contradictory findings and streamline the litigation.
Disputes over wills are usually handled through civil proceedings in the Probate Registry or Chancery Division of the High Court. The first step is often a caveat being lodged by a party seeking to prevent the executors from obtaining a grant of probate. This effectively freezes the estate administration pending resolution of the dispute.
A formal claim may then be issued, usually for a declaration that the will is invalid due to lack of capacity at the time of execution. Parties may request disclosure of all relevant documentation, including medical records and solicitor’s files, and may serve witness statements and expert reports in accordance with the court’s timetable.
If the matter proceeds to trial, the court will weigh the evidence and decide whether the testator had capacity. Costs can be substantial, and the process is time-consuming and adversarial.
Many disputes can be resolved outside the courtroom. Mediation is strongly encouraged in contentious probate claims, and courts may penalise parties who fail to attempt it. Mediation provides a confidential and more flexible forum for discussion, allowing families to reach compromise where a legal solution may be unsatisfactory or destructive.
Creative settlements may involve dividing the estate differently while preserving some of the wishes expressed in the contested will. Mediators with experience in probate disputes can help families avoid deeply entrenched positions and find common ground.
While not all mental capacity challenges can be prevented, several steps can help reduce the risk:
1. Encourage loved ones to make wills early and update them regularly when capacity is not in question.
2. Instruct experienced solicitors who can apply best practices and make detailed file notes.
3. Consider obtaining a capacity assessment from a medical professional, particularly if capacity is borderline or conditions such as dementia exist.
4. Record the rationale behind decisions that may deviate from expectations – for example, favouring one child over another due to previous gifts or different financial needs.
5. Store wills securely and ensure those involved in the process understand the importance of transparency and fairness.
Executors navigating a disputed will must tread carefully. Their role is to remain neutral and not take sides in the dispute, unless they themselves have a personal interest. They must preserve the estate and avoid distributing assets prematurely. Legal advice is essential, particularly when a caveat is in place or proceedings have been issued.
Beneficiaries facing the loss of an expected inheritance due to a new will may understandably feel betrayed or confused. Transparency and legal clarity are vital to managing expectations and maintaining family harmony where possible.
Conversely, those defending a new will must be prepared to show that any involvement with the testator’s decision-making did not amount to coercion or undue influence. Evidence will be required to show the testator acted independently and with full understanding.
Claims surrounding mental capacity in the probate context are among the most complex types of civil litigation. They involve not only legal and medical issues but also the emotional weight of bereavement, family rifts, and the division of wealth. Courts look for cogent evidence that meets the legal threshold, with no presumption that a later will is invalid simply because it surprises or disappoints.
With careful planning, responsible will-making, informed legal advice, and respect for best practice, many of these disputes can be avoided. When they do arise, taking a responsible and compassionate approach can lead to outcomes that honour both the law and the often-conflicted wishes of those who have passed away.
Privacy Policy
Terms and Conditions
Disclaimer
COPYRIGHT © 2024 MY WILL AND PROBATE
