Generally speaking, anyone who is under 18 cannot make a will. The one exception is if that person is a member of the Armed Forces where separate rules apply.
The recent case of CJF has highlighted another situation where it may be possible to make “a will”. In this particular set of circumstances, the will took the format of a settlement/trust document.
CJF had been born in 2005 and suffered severe neurological disabilities following complications at birth. A successful clinical negligence claim was made resulting in a lump sum damages award.
CJF’s father denied paternity and played no part in his life. His mother had looked after him during his early years but he was subsequently taken into foster care partly owing to the permanent damage to his mother’s health because of the complicated birth.
A property was purchased and adapted for CJF’s needs following the settlement in which C JF and his foster carers and their two daughters lived.
CJF became terminally ill whilst still under the age of 18. The intestacy provisions would mean that his estate, which included the property valued at about £350,000, together with a further £310,000 would pass equally between his mother and his father. Nothing would pass to the foster carers who had very limited personal means themselves, meaning they would be unable to purchase the property from the estate.
An emergency application was made to the court who authorised the creation of a settlement enabling the foster family to keep the property, outright and free of tax, with the inheritance tax coming out of residue and the balance then passing to CJF’s mother.
The order does not set out the terms of the settlement but, presumably, there were no inheritance tax capital gains tax implications of creation of the settlement, taking advantage of the disabled trust regime.
Whilst an IPFDA claim might have been possible in the case, it was clearly preferable to resolve everything before CJF passed away, for a quicker and less stressful solution for all concerned.
The case provides an example of a flexible approach by the Court of Protection to a complex set of circumstances which could otherwise have resulted in particular unfairness. It is reminiscent of the earlier case of Bouette v Rose where a mother had to make a claim, following the death of her minor daughter who had received a damages award, under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 to be entitled to the whole of the estate as she had had the sole carer of her daughter during her lifetime – the father having been absent for most of the child’s life. The father was entitled to a one half share under the intestacy rules.
For more information
Please contact Donna Holmes.
Latest news
Anthony Collins advised B3Living on strategic acquisition of 250 social homes
The social housing team at Anthony Collins advised Hertfordshire-based B3Living on the successful acquisition of 250 social homes from Orbit Group.
Tuesday 19 November 2024
Read moreAnthony Collins promotes and appoints 19
19 promotions and appointments have been announced including two partners, two legal directors, two senior associates and four associates, as well as a number of appointments within the central management […]
Monday 4 November 2024
Read moreLatest webinars and podcasts
Podcast: Who gets the microwave? Episode 2 – Non-court dispute resolution
Listen to the second in a series of podcasts from our matrimonial team where Tom Gregory, Chris Lloyd-Smith and Maria Ramon put down their litigation weapons and discuss the importance of […]
Friday 22 November 2024
Read morePODCAST: Who gets the microwave?
The first in a series of podcasts from our matrimonial team begins with the team discussing what happens to pets during divorce and separation.
Friday 16 August 2024
Read more