References: [2013] EWHC 4079 (Ch)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Barling J
Ratio: It was alleged that the signature on the deceased’s will was a forgery.
Held: Given the serious nature of the allegation of forgery the legal burden of proving that the signature on the Will was forged rested on the Defendant, and cogent proof was required from the party making an allegation of forgery, albeit that the civil standard viz the balance of probabilities still applied. Applying those principles, the story behind the proposed will was not credible, and ‘I have without hesitation concluded that in the light of all the evidence Naseem did not sign the Will and that her signature on that document is a forgery.’
This case cites:
- Cited – In re Dellow’s Will Trusts; Lloyd’s Bank v Institute of Cancer Research ChD ([1964] 1 WLR 451, [1964] 1 All ER 771)
Ungoed-Thomas J said: ‘The more serious the allegation the more cogent is the evidence required to overcome the unliklihood of what is alleged and thus to prove it.’ . . - Cited – In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL (Independent 17-Jan-96, [1996] AC 563, [1996] 1 FLR 80, Bailii, [1995] UKHL 16, [1996] Fam Law 74, [1996] 1 FCR 509, [1996] 2 WLR 8, [1996] 1 All ER 1)
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . . - Cited – Fuller v Strum ChD (Gazette 08-Feb-01, Times 14-Feb-01, [2001] WTLR 677)
Mr Strum had come to England as a refugee from Nazi Germany. He had then left to live in Israel, but retained his property in London. A will was challenged on the basis that the signature had been forged. The two attesting witnesses asserted that . . - Cited – Vacciana v Herod ([2005] EWHC 711 (Ch))
. .
(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 25 January 2019
Ref: 519347
The post Ali Haider v Syed: ChD 19 Dec 2013 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.