Sibling Inheritance War

Smooth Radio DJ Philip Chryssikos and his sister, Girls Aloud art director, Maria, have found themselves in a battle over their inheritance following the death of their mother.

Their mother owned a house in West London with an estimated value of £1.2 million. In her will she left the house to her children. Maria has always lived in the childhood home, but her brother insists it should be sold and the sale proceeds split in accordance with their late mother’s will.

The dispute was heard by Judge Luke Ashby in the Central London County Court. Judge Ashby highlighted that Maria had devoted many years to being their elderly mother’s primary carer. Judge Ashby sated that whilst their mother did leave the house to her children to split equally, she wanted Maria to remain in the house without the threat of eviction after her death.

It was ruled that Maria could remain in the house until she reaches the age of 70, then it can be sold and the sale proceeds split. The Judge refused to give Maria a life interest and refused her claim for increased provision from the will.

Maria argued that there had always been an agreement she would stay in the house. In her claim she highlighted that she was the one who cared for their mum when she was poorly and sacrificed her own career.

Philip said that his sister had the same opportunities as him and had chosen to carve her own path in life. He also said she spent her money frivolously and answered to nobody.

It’s reported that the siblings often get into “whirlwind arguments” and have a poor relationship.

Philip has requested an order for sale with vacant possession, which was rejected. At trial his claim for rent from his sister was dropped. Maria’s claim was for a life interest trust and an increase in what she was to receive from the estate. Neither party were successful on the face of it. Their mother had prepared a letter that the judge considered on the balance of probabilities painted a picture that Maria had been the primary carer for many years and her mother wanted her to remain in the property if she paid for it. The line stated ‘and not to be evicted’ was highlighted.

The approach taken by Judge Ashby provided the parties with an alternate order to what was being sought. It clearly took into consideration the deceased’s wishes and provided a pragmatic approach was taken to deal with the issues.

This dispute highlights the importance of documenting your wishes and the reasons for these. Whilst a party may not be happy with your choices, if a claim is raised then this will be beneficial for the court to understand why the choices have been made and how thing can be decided.