Shama Amnir & Ors. v Fahid Bala & Ors.
[2023] EWHC 1054 (Ch)
Wayne Anthony Larsen & Anor v Heather Diane Annan
28 March 2023
[2023] EWHC 662 (Ch)
High Court
Two brothers sued their sister over their dad's will, which gave them each a little money but most to the sister. One brother lost because he wasn't in need. The other brother won a bit extra money for his health problems because the judge thought his dad should have given him more.
Key Facts
- •George Alfred Annan died on 6 January 2021, leaving a will dated 26 March 2013.
- •The will left £10,000 to each of his three children (Wayne, Russell, and Heather), with the residue to his wife (predeceased him) and then to Heather.
- •Wayne and Russell claimed reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975.
- •George's will reflected his belief that his sons had misbehaved, leading to the minimal provision in the will.
- •Wayne had a manslaughter conviction, and Russell had a gambling problem.
- •The estate consisted primarily of a £220,000 property and £255,743 in bank accounts.
- •Wayne is married with six adult children, owns three properties and runs a business.
- •Russell is chronically disabled with Crohn's disease, anxiety, and spondylitis and receives benefits.
- •Heather is the sole beneficiary under the will and also relies on benefits.
Legal Principles
Reasonable financial provision for a child under the 1975 Act is limited to maintenance needs, assessed by the standard appropriate to their circumstances, not just subsistence level.
Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, s.1(2)(b), Ilott v Mitson (No.2) [2017] UKSC 17
Need is a necessary but not sufficient condition for an order; there must be a moral claim or other relevant factor.
Ilott v Mitson (No.2) [2017] UKSC 17; Re Coventry [1980] Ch 461
The court considers the financial resources and needs of all applicants and beneficiaries.
Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, s.3(1)(a)-(c)
The court considers the deceased's obligations and responsibilities towards applicants and beneficiaries.
Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, s.3(1)(d)
The court considers the size and nature of the estate.
Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, s.3(1)(e)
The court considers any physical or mental disability of applicants or beneficiaries.
Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, s.3(1)(f)
The court considers the conduct of the applicant and any other person.
Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, s.3(1)(g)
Outcomes
Wayne's claim dismissed.
The court found Wayne's financial resources and income sufficient to meet his needs; the £10,000 provided in the will was deemed reasonable provision.
Russell's claim partially allowed.
The court found that while Russell's current needs were met, his disabilities and likely future care needs were not adequately addressed by the will. A £25,000 discretionary trust was ordered to cover future care costs.