References: [1934] Ch 384
Coram: Luxmoore J
Ratio: A second will was described as the last will and moreover referred to the first will as the cancelled will, the testatrix having written on a copy of it the word ‘cancelled’.
Held: Neither feature was sufficient to effect a complete revocation of the earlier will. What was conclusive in that regard was that the second will was wholly inconsistent with the first. An implied revocation was found because a clear inconsistency between the successive testamentary instruments was identified, so that the presumption against implied revocation was rebutted.
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:
- Approved – Re Resch’s Will Trusts; Vera Caroline Le Crasv Perpetual Trustee Company Limited PC ([1967] 3 All ER 915, [1968] 3 WLR 1153, [1969] 1 AC 514, Bailii, [1967] UKPC 23)
(New South Wales) The testator left a series of testamentary provisions including gifts which worked cumulatively. Lord Wilberforce discussed the breadth of evidence admissible in the probate court: ‘The principles which ought to be applied on such . . - Cited – Marley v Rawlings and Another SC (Bailii, [2014] UKSC 2, [2014] 2 WLR 213, [2014] WTLR 299, 16 ITELR 642, [2014] 1 All ER 807, [2014] WLR(D) 18, [2014] Fam Law 466, Bailii Summary, WLRD, UKSC 2012/0057, SC Summary, SC)
A husband and wife had each executed the will which had been prepared for the other, owing to an oversight on the part of their solicitor; the question which arose was whether the will of the husband, who died after his wife, was valid. The parties . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 11 April 2017
Ref: 536793
The post In re Hawksley’s Settlement; Black v Tidy: 1934 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.