Master Brightwell has today handed down judgment in Gowing and Others v (1) Terence Arthur Ward (2) Susan Wiltshire in a dispute concerning the validity of the will of the late Mr Frederick Ward. The Claimants challenged the validity of Mr Ward’s will on ‘all four fronts’, alleging lack of capacity, lack of knowledge and approval, undue influence and fraudulent calumny against the Defendants, in their capacities as Executors of Mr Ward’s estate.
The Court dismissed each of the Defendants’ challenges, finding that Mr Ward had testamentary capacity at the time of the execution of the will and knew and approved of its contents. The remaining serious allegations of undue influence and fraud were similarly dismissed, with Master Brightwell reasoning that “…by some considerable margin, I find that [Mr Ward] made the 2018 Will as a free agent and that it was not vitiated by undue influence or fraud”.
The judgment is notable for its helpful discussion of the applicable burdens of proof (and when these ‘shift’) when challenging a will on these four grounds and on the unreliability of a witness’ recollection of historic events (and the proper weight which the Court can and should rather give to contemporaneous documents and correspondence).
Maxwell Myers acted for the successful Defendants, in their capacities as Executors of the estate.
The full judgment can be read here.