References: [2007] EWHC 3060 (Ch), [2008] WTLR 339
Links: Bailii
Coram: Norris J
Ratio: A claim was made for the proof of a will and of a codicil as a mutual will.
Norris J said of one witness: ‘I have a deep sense that her evidence is not based upon a real recollection of two brief incidents (putting her signature on a document one or two decades ago) but upon a reconstruction of what she would have done having regard to her inability to recollect the Deceased’s attendance at Battersea and her willingness to do whatever Mr Walters requested. I am also alert to the danger that recollection can be coloured by the context in which it is invited.’
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:
- Appeal from – Walters v Olins CA (Bailii, [2008] EWCA Civ 782, [2009] Ch 212, [2009] 2 WLR 1, [2008] WTLR 1449)
The claimant appealed against a finding that he had entered into a mutual will contract with the deceased.
Held: It is a legally necessary condition of mutual wills that there is clear and satisfactory evidence of a contract between two . . - Cited – Legg and Another v Burton and Others ChD (Bailii, [2017] EWHC 2088 (Ch))
The parties disputed whether wills were mutual. The claimants challenged the probate granted to a later will of their deceased mother, saying that her earlier will had been mutual and irrevocable after the death of their father.
Held: The . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 05 September 2019
Ref: 341757
The post Olins v Walters: ChD 19 Dec 2007 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.