Inheritance row
A judge has ruled that a 92-year-old dying woman’s decision to tear up her will, with assistance from her solicitor, was a valid demonstration of testamentary capacity.
In a case that puts a new spin on “ripping up the rule book”, the High Court found that a dying woman’s nod to her solicitor was enough to confirm her decision to tear up her will. The ruling means Carry Keats’ estate, once destined for her cousins, will instead pass intestate to her younger sister.
The dispute in Crew & Anor v Oakley & Ors, centred on whether Keats had the mental capacity to revoke her will by destruction and whether the act met the legal requirements under section 20 of the Wills Act 1837.
In a scene straight out of a legal drama, Keats attempted to tear up her will during a hospital visit from her solicitor, Haffwen Webb, but needed assistance to finish the job. With a nod of approval, Webb stepped in, and together they completed the act — a move her cousins later contested in court.
Webb, a partner at Hampshire firm Kirklands, testified that Keats was a strong-willed client who knew her own mind. “Her character hadn’t changed. She was still the same old Carry,” Webb said, adding that she had “no shadow of a doubt” about her client’s capacity to make decisions that day.
The cousins argued otherwise, pointing to Keats’ bouts of delirium and claiming she merely “acquiesced” in the will’s destruction. They relied on expert testimony that suggested Keats’ mental state may have been compromised. But High Court judge, Deputy Master Linwood, wasn’t persuaded, concluding that Keats had a clear window of lucidity when she tore through most of the document and nodded for Webb to help with the rest.
The judge concluded that “there was a positive communication and not mere acquiescence, as Carry looked at Mrs Webb and responded to her direct offer with a physical command or instruction reflecting her wish that Mrs Webb should actively assist her to complete the tearing in half of the will.” He praised Webb as a “professional and practical” witness who wouldn’t have let the revocation proceed if she had any doubts. While he noted that Webb’s attendance note could have been more detailed, the judge accepted her account as credible and consistent.
According to the facts of the case, Keats’ decision to revoke her will followed a falling-out with her cousins in late 2021 over plans she suspected were being made to place her in a care home. She reconciled with her sister soon after and instructed Webb to destroy the will, leaving her estate to pass by intestacy.
The case highlights the delicate balance solicitors must strike in end-of-life decisions, particularly when capacity is in question.
