Legacies To Charities – Can They Be Challenged?

Charities are often named as beneficiaries in Wills. Sometimes charities receive small specific sums of money, but there are a number of examples of wealthy people leaving almost their entire estate to charity. This does not always go down very well with the relatives of the deceased, particularly their children, and claims can be brought by disappointed beneficiaries looking for a better windfall.

Disputing legacies to charities

Claims can be brought not only by children, but by a cohabitant of two years or more, the spouse of the deceased and any other person who was either:

1. Treated as a child of the family; or
2. Being maintained by the deceased.

Lady Lucan

Recently, there were news reports concerning the widow of Lord Lucan, Veronica. Lord Lucan had infamously disappeared following the murder of their children’s nanny in the 1970s and is now “presumed dead”. Veronica died in September.

She had incorrectly believed that she was suffering from Parkinson’s disease and died following an overdose. Very recently, it turned out that she had left her entire estate, worth over £500,000, to Shelter, the homelessness charity, effectively disinheriting her three children and other relatives.

When children in particular are not provided for in a Will, there is a means of bringing a claim which will be of concern to named beneficiaries like charities. But the size of any award is not always as large as the claimant might hope.

Ilott v Mitson

Perhaps the most famous example of this was the Ilott v Mitson case.

The claimant, Heather Ilott, was the estranged daughter of the deceased. She brought a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 after having received nothing from her late mother’s estate, which was all to be left to animal charities. Ms Ilott and her mother had also not spoken in years, her mother having disapproved of Ms Ilott’s way of life.

Ms Ilott brought a claim in the High Court and was awarded £50,000. However, she was living in a housing association property and in receipt of benefits. The award would not have been enough to enable her to buy her property and she might have lost her benefits. The Court of Appeal awarded her £143,000. The charities therefore would have lost out significantly. This decision was also appealed and the Supreme Court reinstated the first award of £50,000.

In a hotly anticipated judgment, the Supreme Court directed that adult children can normally only bring a claim for maintenance, and not for as much money as they feel they need to achieve a higher standard of living. The Supreme Court effectively placed more emphasis on the wishes and feelings of the Deceased. The argument made by Ms Ilott – that the charities (who would not have been depending on a gift from her mother) were less likely to be prejudiced than she was – was rejected. This will be encouraging for charities who do depend to some extent on legacies from estates.

In the case of Lady Lucan, the question remains as to whether Shelter could face a run for their money from any relatives. Lady Lucan had three adult children, namely George, Frances and Camilla, and she had not spoken to them since the 1980s. Enclosed with her Will was a statement of wishes, and Lady Lucan had specifically commented:

“In view of the lack of good manners and reverence shown to me as their parent, I do not wish any of my three children to benefit from my death any more than they have to.”

Whilst Lady Lucan’s children may decide not to take any action, if they were to do so, they might still have a chance of bringing a claim for maintenance if they can show genuine financial need. Hypothetically, if they were to pursue a claim, the Court will consider a number of factors including their specific financial resources and needs, and the effect that making an award will have on any other relative or organisation.

However the Court will also consider whether Lady Lucan had any obligation to maintain her children – i.e. prior to her death, did they depend on her money? The answer would have to be no. Another factor a Judge would look at is conduct. In view of the fact that there had been no contact between Lady Lucan and her children for the best part of 30 years, and she expressly omitted them from her Will, it is likely that unless there are any question marks over the validity of the Will, a Court may well find that her intentions were very clear. Even if somebody is perceived to be behaving unreasonably, the precedent set by Ilott v Mitson will be that the wishes of the deceased are respected, unless a close relative is likely to be plunged into poverty as a result.

Therefore Shelter should be fairly confident that if anybody brought a claim for provision from Lady Lucan’s estate, they would have a lot to do to persuade a Judge that it would be right to make an award. Charities generally can be fairly commercial about estate legacies and as Courts do have a wide discretion, settlement should always be considered – not least because legal costs usually come from the estate and a protracted argument will diminish the pot.