References: [2012] EWCA Civ 1635
Links: Bailii
Coram: Mummery LJ, Morgan J
Ratio: The will on its face was validly executed but evidence had established that one witness had not been present. The judge had found the evidence to be sufficient to rebut the strong presumption that the will had been validly executed. Permission to appeal was now sought.
Held: Permission to appeal had been correctly refused, there being no point of law raised. The appeal requested the court, without the benefit of seeing the witnesses of fact, to reach a different conclusion from that of the judge who had.
This case cites:
- Appeal from – Ahluwalia v Singh and Others ChD ([2012] WTLR 1, Bailii, [2011] EWHC 2907 (Ch))
The claimant challenged the validity of the will, saying that it had not been validly attested, the two witnesses not being present at the same time despite the attestation clause saying they had been.
Held: The challenge succeeded. . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 05-Aug-16
Ref: 466961