Failure of gifts: uncertainty, beneficiary as witness, divorce

Can You Answer This?

Practice with real exam questions

Miranda, a passionate collector of rare manuscripts and digital art, decided to leave most of her intangible assets, including cryptocurrencies and intellectual property rights, to her nephew Wyatt. In her will, she wrote that Wyatt should inherit “the majority of my intangible assets” in recognition of his unwavering support throughout the years. Miranda then asked Wyatt’s spouse, Fiona, along with her neighbor, to witness the will. Shortly after the will was executed, Wyatt and Fiona divorced. When Miranda passed away, an issue arose regarding the validity of Wyatt’s gift.


Which of the following is the most accurate statement concerning the gift to Wyatt?

Introduction

The failure of gifts in wills arises when the intended distribution of a testator's assets cannot be executed as specified, due to legal deficiencies or events that invalidate those provisions. Key factors leading to such failures include uncertainty in the terms of the will, where the subject matter or beneficiaries are not clearly defined; instances where a beneficiary acts as a witness to the will's execution, contravening statutory regulations; and the effects of divorce on testamentary gifts to former spouses. Understanding these principles is essential to ensuring that wills are interpreted and administered in accordance with the testator's true intentions within the legal framework.

Uncertainty in Wills

Uncertainty in wills occurs when the language used in the testamentary document is ambiguous or lacks sufficient clarity, making it difficult to ascertain the testator's intentions. This can lead to the failure of gifts due to the inability to enforce the provisions as written. There are three primary types of uncertainty recognized in legal contexts: subject matter uncertainty, object uncertainty, and administrative unworkability.

Types of Uncertainty

  1. Subject Matter Uncertainty: This arises when the assets or property intended to be gifted are not clearly identified. For example, a clause in a will that leaves "some of my valuable possessions" to a beneficiary lacks specificity, making it unclear which items are included. In Palmer v Simmonds (1854) 2 Drew 221, a gift of "the bulk of my residuary estate" was deemed too uncertain to be enforceable.

  2. Object Uncertainty: This pertains to ambiguity regarding the beneficiaries who are to receive gifts. If the description of beneficiaries is too vague, such as leaving assets "to my friends," it becomes challenging to determine who qualifies. The case of Re Baden's Deed Trusts (No 2) [1973] Ch 9 addressed this issue by considering whether the class of beneficiaries could be ascertained with sufficient certainty.

  3. Administrative Unworkability: This occurs when the terms of the will are so broad that it becomes impractical to carry out the testator's instructions. For instance, directing trustees to distribute assets among "all the residents of London" would be administratively unfeasible. In R v District Auditor ex parte West Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council [1986] RVR 24, a trust for the benefit of "the inhabitants of the County of West Yorkshire" was held invalid due to administrative unworkability.

Legal Guidelines

Courts strive to uphold the testator's intentions wherever possible, employing rules of construction to interpret ambiguous provisions. The principle established in Marley v Rawlings [2014] UKSC 2 emphasizes a purposive approach, allowing the correction of obvious mistakes if the testator's true intentions can be discerned from the will itself. However, the courts cannot rewrite the will but may admit extrinsic evidence under Section 21 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 to resolve ambiguities.

Example

Consider a testator who leaves "a reasonable sum" to a named beneficiary without specifying the amount. This lack of clarity could render the gift invalid due to subject matter uncertainty. However, the court may interpret "reasonable sum" by considering the overall context of the will and the circumstances surrounding its creation, provided that sufficient guidance is available.

Beneficiary as Witness

Under the Wills Act 1837, certain formalities must be observed for a will to be valid. One critical requirement is that the will must be signed by the testator in the presence of at least two witnesses, who then attest and sign the will. Section 15 of the Act stipulates that if a beneficiary (or their spouse or civil partner) witnesses the will, any gift to that beneficiary becomes void, although the rest of the will remains valid.

Statutory Framework

  • Section 15, Wills Act 1837: A gift to a person (or their spouse or civil partner) who attests the execution of a will is void.
  • Purpose: This provision aims to prevent undue influence and ensure the integrity of the witnessing process by eliminating any personal gain for witnesses.

Exceptions and Considerations

  • Creditors and Executors: A creditor who witnesses a will can still benefit from the repayment of debts specified in the will. Similarly, an executor who is not a beneficiary may witness the will without invalidating their appointment.
  • Gifts Saved by Section 1 of the Wills Act 1968: In limited circumstances, where the will has been prepared by a solicitor and the attesting beneficiary receives no greater benefit than they would under intestacy, the gift may be upheld.
  • Awareness Irrelevant: The witness's knowledge of their beneficiary status is not a factor; the gift is void regardless of intent or awareness.

Case Law

In Re Bravda, decd [1968] 1 WLR 278, a beneficiary who witnessed the will was unable to receive their gift, reinforcing the strict application of Section 15. The courts have consistently upheld this rule to maintain the validity of the witnessing process.

Example

Suppose a testator asks their adult child to witness the signing of their will, which includes a gift to that child. Despite the familial trust, the gift to the child would be void under Section 15. The remainder of the will would still be effective, but the intended gift to the child would fail, potentially resulting in unintended consequences for the distribution of the estate.

Divorce and Its Effects on Wills

When a testator divorces after making a will, the law adjusts the will's provisions concerning the former spouse. Section 18A of the Wills Act 1837 provides that any clause in a will that benefits a former spouse is revoked upon divorce, unless the will expressly states otherwise.

Statutory Provisions

  • Section 18A, Wills Act 1837: On the dissolution or annulment of a marriage or civil partnership, any disposition to the former spouse, any appointment of them as executor or trustee, and any grant of a power to the former spouse are revoked, as if they had predeceased the testator.
  • Exceptions: If the will contains a contrary intention, explicitly stating that the provisions are to remain effective despite divorce, then the clauses remain valid.

Impact on the Will

  • Revocation of Gifts: Any gifts or bequests to the former spouse are automatically revoked upon divorce.
  • Role as Executor or Trustee: The former spouse is deemed to have predeceased the testator in relation to any appointments, and alternative provisions in the will may take effect.
  • Partial Revocation: The revocation applies only to the provisions concerning the former spouse; the rest of the will remains valid.

Judicial Interpretation

In Re Sinclair [1985] 1 WLR 310, the court considered the effect of divorce on wills and affirmed that the statutory provisions apply strictly. The former spouse cannot benefit from the will unless the testator makes a new will or codicil after the divorce, reinstating the gifts.

Example

A testator creates a will leaving their entire estate to their spouse. After the couple divorces, the testator does not update the will and later passes away. Under Section 18A, the gift to the former spouse is revoked. If there is no residuary clause or alternative beneficiaries specified, the estate would be distributed according to the rules of intestacy, which may lead to unintended recipients inheriting the estate.

Conclusion

The interplay of uncertainty in wills, beneficiaries acting as witnesses, and the impact of divorce can collectively lead to the failure of testamentary gifts, highlighting the importance of precise drafting and adherence to statutory formalities. For instance, consider a testator who, prior to divorcing, drafts a will leaving "a substantial portion of my estate" to their spouse, who also acts as a witness to the will. The use of the term "a substantial portion" introduces subject matter uncertainty due to its vagueness. Additionally, the spouse witnessing the will triggers Section 15 of the Wills Act 1837, rendering any gift to them void. Upon divorce, Section 18A further revokes any dispositions to the former spouse. In this scenario, the cumulative effect of ambiguity, invalid witnessing, and divorce leads to the failure of the intended gift, potentially resulting in the estate being distributed contrary to the testator's wishes. To avoid such outcomes, it is imperative to use clear and unambiguous language, ensure that beneficiaries do not witness the will, and update testamentary documents following significant life events such as divorce. Legal professionals must meticulously apply these principles to safeguard the testator's intentions and uphold the validity of the will in accordance with established statutes and case law.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Barbri SQE
One-time Fee
$3,800-6,900
BPP SQE
One-time Fee
$5,400-8,200
College of Legal P...
One-time Fee
$2,300-9,100
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350
Law Training Centr...
One-time Fee
$500-6,200
QLTS SQE
One-time Fee
$2,500-3,800
University of Law...
One-time Fee
$6,200-22,400

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of December 2024. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

Practice. Learn. Excel.

Features designed to support your job and test preparation

Question Bank

Access 100,000+ questions that adapt to your performance level and learning style.

Performance Analytics

Track your progress across topics and identify knowledge gaps with comprehensive analytics and insights.

Multi-Assessment Support

Prepare for multiple exams simultaneously, from academic tests to professional certifications.

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal