“You Can’t Always Get What You Want” when it comes to Will and Estate challenges
“You Can’t Always Get What You Want” when it comes to Will and Estate challenges
As the latest performance at the Chichester Festival Theatre (CFT) ‘Redlands’ amuses and entertains the audience with its take one of the more unusual legal cases in history, at Irwin Mitchell we consider some of the legal themes that arise.
A Clash of the Generations
The Redlands case encapsulates key themes of the sixties in its “clash of the generations” plotline: the Stones epitomised so much of the era’s counterculture with their new-found liberalism, self-expression and seemingly hedonistic lifestyles, all of which seemed to spark fury in some quarters of the British establishment.
Our modern-day clash of the generations has new iterations: none less than that of the surge of wranglings both inside and out of court over disputed inheritance which – as Keith and Mick soon discovered with their own personal affairs - becomes the source of much media coverage and commentary where celebrity status is involved.
Not for “The Last Time” with Musicians, Court and Controversy
The generational clashes of several infamous musicians’ estates have been laid bare in the media in the recent years. The Jackson siblings claimed the late Michael Jackson’s last will that disinherited them was a forgery. Jimi Hendrix’s multimillion dollar estate was the subject of decades of litigation between family members where there was no will, whilst James Brown’s will was contested by his purported wife and children in proceedings that lasted almost 15 years before final settlement in 2021.
The extent to which the intense media coverage of these cases has impacted on the legal outcomes could be open to debate, but surely all the disappointed beneficiaries would have experienced “no satisfaction” in having their family grievances aired so publicly. It is a consideration that families need to bear in mind when contemplating litigation as a ‘day in court’ is often not as attractive or glamorous as TV or film would lead many to believe. Our aim when helping clients is to resolve will and estate disputes outside of the court process, wherever possible.
A Legacy of the “Good Times”?
With recent estimates of contested probate cases reaching as many as 10,000 a year[1] (the vast majority settling outside of court), there has been much speculation about the root causes of this growing wave. One aspect is the media coverage of cases which has led to greater public awareness of entitlements under inheritance law, sparking many to pursue claims.
Other observers see the baby boomers’ property-rich estates as ripe for legal claims, coupled with the increasingly difficult financial circumstances of many claimants in the post-covid, cost-of-living-crisis-plagued Britain. Elsewhere, second marriages and other complex and blended family structures are cited as heightening the potential for familial discord, whilst a rise in dementia across the population (the Alzheimer’s Society estimating 982,000 people live with dementia in the UK alone) may account for increases in will validity challenges on the grounds of lack of capacity.
“Now I’ve Got a Witness” – the role of Evidence in Estate Disputes
The CFT write up of the Redlands play describes it as “possibly the most bizarre English court case ever”, quite a fitting description. The police charged Mick Jagger and Keith Richards with criminal offences despite, arguably, a lack of evidence.
Whilst it is easy to focus on the issues surrounding Jagger and Richards’ past and their celebrity status, one of the main points highlighted by the case is the importance of proper evidence. You must be able to evidence what you are claiming, suspicions alone will not suffice.
If you are seeking to challenge a will, you must be able to prove the grounds on which you are challenging it so you can ‘shift the burden’ onto the defendant to prove the will is in fact valid. Evidence is critical to ensure the claim is worth pursuing. Whether it’s contesting a will or claiming provision from an estate, there could be significant costs risks if you proceed with a claim purely based on a “sweet incense smell” (as was observed at the Redlands property!).
Evidence enables the court to assess the facts of the case fairly.
In the Will, Trust and Estate Disputes Team, we can assist you gather the necessary evidence and assess the merits of your potential claim. Having a solicitor instructed can save you time and ensure that any deadlines applicable to your claim are not missed.
You may be able to claim against an estate if you do not believe that you have been provided for sufficiently, if you have been left out of the will entirely, or if you are concerned that the deceased lacked testamentary capacity at the time of providing instructions for and signing the will.
Whilst a claim may never reach court, strong evidence is also very useful for mediation. Mediation involves a meeting/series of meetings where a neutral individual called a mediator assists with negotiations between the parties. The goal of the mediation is to reach a settlement between the parties that is recorded in writing and signed so that no further costs need to be incurred by taking the matter to Court.
Evidence is important in this matter as if you are able to show that you have a strong case, the other party may be more inclined to settle at this stage as opposed to risking a court case.
If you believe that you could have a Will, Trust or Estate Dispute case, our specialist team can advise you on whether the matter is worth pursuing, what evidence you might need and how we can assist with resolving the dispute.
“Little by Little” – Reforms Abound!
The Redlands case brought about reforms following the review of drug and possession laws. Drug law reforms are often cited in the news as being under review – less so are reviews into will, trust and estate disputes - but here are a couple of recent reviews in this area
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK government temporarily revised the laws surrounding how you could witness a will in order to accommodate the restrictions placed on the public by the various lockdowns. These amendments allowed for the witnessing of wills via live video calls, such as Zoom, provided certain conditions were complied with. This temporary measure was initially set to expire in January 2022 but was extended to January 2024 as there were concerns about further strains of the virus emerging. The changes are no longer in force.
This is a rare example where allowing for some flexibility within the will witnessing process has been considered beneficial – much like the flexibility that was demanded by some Rolling Stones fans during the Redlands case who felt that the court had used unnecessary force upon Jagger and Richards. William Rees-Mogg famously reflected on this in his editorial titled ‘Who breaks a butterfly upon a wheel?’[2] which was instrumental in ensuring the stars spent less than 3 days in prison and aided them in having their sentences dismissed upon appeal. Whether the changes to video witnessing of a will results in a stream of new cases about validity or undue influence or even fraud, is still to be seen.
The Rolling Stones have had some infamous relationships and marriages as well as divorces throughout their career – which would have impacted their wills each time they remarried. Under current law, a will is revoked by the subsequent marriage of the testator. This is unless the will was made in expectation of the marriage, or it is specifically stated within the will that it should not be revoked upon a new marriage.
The law concerning his automatic revocation is currently under review as it, on occasion, has unintended consequences, potentially disregarding the testamentary wishes of the testator and having a knock on effect for their loved ones post death. It can also cause a difficult situation to arise where there is a ‘predatory marriage’ – a marriage where a younger person, marries someone with the aim of benefitting from that person’s estate when they die due to any will they may already have in place being revoked by the marriage. Financial gain is their main motive, and this can leave families finding their loved ones possessions, assets and even photographs, being lost to that ‘predator’ as a result of the current rules.
One thing remains for certain, will and estate disputes are here to stay and sadly there will always be examples of family disagreements when it comes to the testamentary intentions left behind by a key family figure. In Redlands, the Stones sing of ‘Mercy Mercy’ and inevitably (not getting any) ‘Satisfaction’ – but with the right legal advice and obtaining the necessary evidence, a resolution of such claims should nearly always be possible avoiding the stress, emotion, legal costs and potential media interest of court action. Sadly there is not usually any singing in the Court, contrary to the delightful suggestion otherwise in Redlands!
[1] ‘Ruinously expensive’: record number of inheritance disputes in England and Wales | Consumer affairs | The Guardian
[2] William Rees-Mogg ‘Who breaks a butterfly upon a wheel?’ The Times 1 July 1967
