References: [2007] EWHC 1607 (Fam), [2007] WTLR 1129
Links: Bailii
Coram: Sir Mark Potter P
Ratio: The plaintiff sought the unsealing of the wills of the late Queen Mother and of the late Princess Margaret, claiming that these would assist him establishing that he was the illegitimate son of the latter.
Held: The application was frivolous. None of the evidence presented remotely constituted evidence of what the claimant asserted. Though section 124 appeared to grant a full right to see a will lodged with the registry, that right was subject to a discretion in the court. As to his human rights claim that he was entitled to know: ‘The Human Rights Act was enacted and the Convention concluded in order to protect from interference and prejudice real rights and existing situations, not illusory rights or imaginary claims. A claimant is entitled to respect for the existence and development of his or her real family life under Article 8 and not for a fantasy family life, the product of his or her imagination. ‘ The claim failed.
Statutes: Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987, Supreme Court Act 1981 124
This case cites:
- Cited – In re: King George III ((1822) 1 Add 255)
The will of the Sovereign is not subject to probate. . . - Cited – Reichal v Magrath ((1889) 14 AC 665)
The court has an inherent jurisdiction to strike out all proceedings before it which are obviously frivolous or vexatious or an abuse of its process. . . - Cited – In re Stollery ([1926] Ch 284)
A birth certificate is prima facie evidence of all matters required by statute to be entered in the certificate. . . - Cited – Gouriet v Union of Post Office Workers HL ([1978] AC 435, Bailii, [1977] UKHL 5, [1977] 3 All ER 70)
The claimant sought an injunction to prevent the respondent Trades Union calling on its members to boycott mail to South Africa. The respondents challenged the ability of the court to make such an order.
Held: The wide wording of the statute . . - Cited – Jackson v Jackson and Pavan ([1964] P 25)
A properly issued birth certificate is prima facie evidence of the matters stated. . . - Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte the National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd HL ([1982] AC 617, Bailii, [1981] UKHL 2, [1981] 2 All ER 93, [1981] 2 WLR 722, Bailii, [1981] UKHL TC_55_133, [1981] 1 WLR 793, [1981] TR 215, 55 TC 24, [1981] STC 344)
The Commissioners had been concerned at tax evasion of up to andpound;1 million a year by casual workers employed in Fleet Street. They agreed with the employers and unions to collect tax in the future, but that they would not pursue those who had . . - Cited – Re Angela Roddy (a child) (identification: restriction on publication), Torbay Borough Council v News Group Newspapers FD ([2003] EWHC 2927 (Fam), [2004] 1 FCR 30, [2004] 2 FLR 949, Bailii, [2004] EMLR 8)
A twelve year old girl had become pregnant. The Catholic Church was said to have paid her not to have an abortion. After the birth she and her baby were taken into care. The authority proposed the adoption of the baby. There was more publicity. . . - Cited – Regina v Monopolies and Mergers Commission, ex parte Argyll Group plc CA ([1986] 1 WLR 763, Bailii, [1987] QB 815, (1986) 2 BCC 99086, [1986] EWCA Civ 8, [1986] 2 All ER 257)
The court recast in simpler language the provision in section 75 empowering the Secretary of State to make a merger reference to the Commission: ‘where it appears to him that it is or may be the fact that arrangements are in progress or in . . - Cited – Pretty v The United Kingdom ECHR (2346/02, (2002) 35 EHRR 1, Worldlii, [2002] ECHR 427, Bailii, (2002) 66 BMLR 147, 12 BHRC 149, [2002] Fam Law 588, [2002] 2 FCR 97, [2002] All ER (D) 286 (Apr), [2002] 2 FLR 45)
The applicant was paralysed and suffered a degenerative condition. She wanted her husband to be allowed to assist her suicide by accompanying her to Switzerland. English law would not excuse such behaviour. She argued that the right to die is not . . - Cited – Bensaid v The United Kingdom ECHR (44599/98, (2001) 33 EHRR 205, (2001) 33 EHRR 10, [2001] ECHR 82, Bailii, [2001] INLR 325, 11 BHRC 297)
The applicant was a schizophrenic and an illegal immigrant. He claimed that his removal to Algeria would deprive him of essential medical treatment and sever ties that he had developed in the UK that were important for his well-being. He claimed . . - Cited – Botta v Italy ECHR (21439/93, Bailii, [1998] ECHR 12, , Bailii, [1996] ECHR 83)
The claimant, who was disabled, said that his Article 8 rights were infringed because, in breach of Italian law, there were no facilities to enable him to get to the sea when he went on holiday.
Held: ‘Private life . . includes a person’s . . - Cited – Leander v Sweden ECHR ([1987] 9 EHRR 433, 9248/81, Bailii, [1987] ECHR 4, Bailii)
Mr Leander had been refused employment at a museum located on a naval base, having been assessed as a security risk on the basis of information stored on a register maintained by State security services that had not been disclosed him. Mr Leander . . - Cited – Guerra and Others v Italy ECHR (Gazette 20-May-98, 14967/89, (1998) 26 EHRR 357, Bailii, [1998] ECHR 7, , Bailii)
(Grand Chamber) The applicants lived about 1km from a chemical factory which produced fertilizers and other chemicals and was classified as ‘high risk’ in criteria set out by Presidential Decree.
Held: Failure by a government to release to an . . - Cited – Niemietz v Germany ECHR (13710/88, [1992] 16 EHRR 97, Worldlii, [1992] ECHR 80, Bailii)
A lawyer complained that a search of his offices was an interference with his private life.
Held: In construing the term ‘private life’, ‘it would be too restrictive to limit the notion of an ‘inner circle’ in which the individual may live his . . - Cited – Gaskin v The United Kingdom ECHR (10454/83, [1990] 1 FLR 167, Bailii, [1989] ECHR 13, (1989) 12 EHRR 36, Bailii)
The applicant complained of ill-treatment while he was in the care of a local authority and living with foster parents. He sought access to his case records held by the local authority but his request was denied.
Held: The refusal to allow him . .
(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:
- Appeal from – Brown v Executors of the Estate of HM Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother and others CA (Bailii, [2008] EWCA Civ 56, [2008] 1 WLR 2327, [2008] 1 WLR 2327)
The claimant sought leave to appeal refusal of access to the will of Princess Margaret. He wished to prove that he was her illegitimate son. The will had been subject to an order providing that its contens were not to be published.
Held: . . - Cited – Re Benmusa FD (Bailii, [2017] EWHC 494 (Fam))
The claimant sought to have unsealed the will of the late Princess Margaret.
Held: The application was struck out: ‘The applicant has not articulated any intelligible basis for her claim. The facts alleged by the applicant neither assert nor . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Last Update: 21-Mar-17
Ref: 254471
The post Brown v HM Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, the Executors of the Estate of and others: FD 5 Jul 2007 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.
