Re estate of Jean Eileen Lech (deceased) – St Clair v King and another [2022] EWHC 40 (Ch)
Case summary
Ms St Clair challenged her step-mother Mrs Jean Eileen Lech’s Will on multiple grounds:
- The existence of a prior mutual Will as Mrs Lech made her previous Will at the same time as her late husband;
- The execution of the Will was induced by the executors’ fraudulent calumny; and
- Mrs Lech didn’t have the testamentary capacity to make her Will as she lacked knowledge and approval of the contents of her Will.
Ms St Clair strongly felt that the beneficiaries in her step-mother’s Will were strangers to her father and that they should not inherit from Mrs Lech’s estate; which Ms Clair submitted was mostly made up of the money her father worked hard for.
Mrs Lech had made a Will at the same time as her late husband Mr Lech in 2007. Mr Lech then died leaving the majority of his estate to his wife. Two years later, Mrs Lech made a new Will to reflect her new testamentary wishes. The new Will excluded Ms St Clair as a beneficiary, and instead appointed her nephew, Mr Peter King, and her friend, the cleaner and helper, Mrs Farrell as executors. She gave small legacies to her and her children and left the residuary estate to Mr King.
In her claim, Ms St Clair theorised that Mrs Farrell looked through the phonebook and worked her way through the ‘Kings’ to find Mr King before introducing him to Mrs Lech shortly before Mrs Lech made her last Will. Ms St Clair accused Mrs Farrell of drinking excessively with her step-mother, “fuelling hatred to family” and had a controlling hand in the preparation and execution of Mrs Lech’s last Will. Ms St Clair did not recognise Mr King as Mrs Lech’s nephew; “at worst, an imposter, and at best a distant relative”.
The Court’s decision
Hearing all of the available evidence, the judge did not find Ms St Clair to be a reliable witness who was ‘engaging in pure fantasy’ and motivated by a ‘genuinely held sense of grievance’ and dismissed her claims giving some of the following reasons:
1. No evidence of agreement was established in respect of the prior Wills made by Mr and Mrs Lech. Mrs Lech was therefore not bound by her previous Will as it was not a mutual Will and was free to make her last Will that revoked all previous Wills and Testaments;
2. Ms St Clair was unable to prove through evidence that there was any fraudulent calumny or undue influence by Mrs Farrell. Mrs Farrell and her children’s legacies were comparatively modest given the size of the estate and reflect the type of legacy Mrs Lech could be expected to leave a good friend who helped her out during her lifetime; and
3.Mrs Lech did have testamentary capacity and she executed her last Will with knowledge and approval of its contents. Her Will was prepared by a solicitor who gave evidence of Mrs Lech’s well-reasoned and consistent intentions behind changing her Will and excluding Ms St Clair from her new Will.
Comment
It is common for grieving family members to feel aggrieved when the estates of their loved ones pass to people they deem ‘unworthy’ or ‘undeserving’. However, testamentary autonomy means people making Wills have the freedom to leave their estate to whomever they like. In this case, Mrs Lech’s husband was free to leave his estate to Mrs Lech entirely and once Mrs Lech inherited her husband’s estate, it was hers absolutely and she was free to leave her estate exactly how she wanted. The above case is a prime example of why one should seek to have their Will prepared and executed with a Private Client professional.
How can we help
Should you believe that there is an issue involving an estate that you are involved in, please do not hesitate to contact a member of our expert Dispute Resolution team in Derby, Leicester, or Nottingham who will be able to assist.
Please call 0800 024 1976 or contact us via our online form.
Contact us