## Question 1 An entrepreneur dies unexpectedly without having updated their will produced 10 years prior, which leaves their entire estate to a charity they were once actively involved with. Since the creation of the will, they married and had two children. The spouse believes that the outdated will does not reflect the deceased's final wishes and seeks legal advice regarding the distribution of the estate. Considering the circumstances, how is the estate likely to be distributed? - A. The estate is distributed to the charity as per the will. - B. The estate is divided equally among the spouse and children. - C. Intestacy rules apply, and the spouse and children have entitlements to the estate. - D. The will is upheld, but the spouse is granted a reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. - E. The entire estate passes to the government as bona vacantia.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is C. Under the intestacy rules, which are triggered by the effect of the entrepreneur's marriage after the will was made, the will is considered null and void. Therefore, the estate does not pass to the charity but is instead distributed according to the rules of intestacy, granting entitlements to the spouse and children. Option A is incorrect because a will is invalidated by the subsequent marriage of the testator, making it impossible for the estate to be distributed to the charity as per the will. Option B is incorrect as the rules of intestacy specify precise shares of the estate for the spouse and children, not an equal division among them. Option D is incorrect because the question's scenario does not apply under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The Act allows for certain claims against the estate but does not directly impact the validity of the will as marriage does. Option E is incorrect since estates pass to the government as bona vacantia only when there are no surviving relatives entitled under the rules of intestacy, which is not the case here.

## Question 2 After the passing of their mother, two siblings discovered a letter in her desk indicating her wish for her elder child to distribute her jewelry collection amongst the family, according to personal notes she had made. Before a formal grant of probate, the elder sibling follows these wishes, distributing the jewelry as described in the notes. Later, the elder sibling decides they do not wish to act as the executor and attempts to step down from this responsibility. Which action best aligns with the legal principles concerning the elder sibling's ability to renounce their role as executor? - A. The elder sibling can renounce their role at any time before a grant of probate if they have not intermeddled in the estate. - B. As the elder sibling has already acted on the deceased's wishes concerning the estate, they are considered to have accepted the role of executor and cannot renounce. - C. The elder sibling can renounce their role as executor after distributing the jewelry, provided no formal actions have been taken. - D. The elder sibling can choose to only administer parts of the estate they prefer, effectively partially renouncing their executorship. - E. They can reverse the distribution of the jewelry, renounce their role as executor, and appoint another family member in their place.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is B. Distributing the jewelry as per the deceased's notes constitutes intermeddling in the estate. Thus, the elder sibling is deemed to have accepted the role of executor and cannot now renounce it. Option A is incorrect because the elder sibling's actions of distributing the jewelry demonstrate an embodiment of executor duties, which is considered intermeddling, rendering any attempt to renounce ineffective. Option C is incorrect because, though no 'formal' actions might have been taken in a legal sense, the actions taken unequivocally relate to the administration of the estate, hence intermeddling has occurred. Option D is incorrect as executorship duties cannot be partially accepted or renounced based on preference; it is an all-encompassing role with responsibilities that cannot be selectively discharged. Option E is incorrect because the renunciation process does not provide for reversal of actions taken prior to renunciation, nor does it allow for the appointing of substitutes by the executor.

## Question 3 The executor of a deceased friend's estate discovers that the estate owes a substantial sum in inheritance tax and has several smaller debts to local businesses. The executor also knows that the deceased left a cherished painting to the deceased's nephew, valued at £15,000. Considering the liquidity issues and the value of the estate's assets, including the painting, the executor decides to auction some of the deceased's antique furniture to raise the necessary funds. After settling the inheritance tax, the executor promptly delivers the painting to the nephew, leaving the estate with just enough to cover the outstanding debts. Did the executor act appropriately in accordance with the duties in the administration of the estate? - A. Yes, the executor acted correctly by prioritising the inheritance tax and securing the nephew's specific gift before paying the estate's debts. - B. No, the executor should have sold the painting given to the nephew to ensure all estate debts were covered before distributing any specific gifts. - C. No, the executor breached the duty by not first using the estate's entire liquidity to settle all debts before distributing specific legacies. - D. Yes, by settling the inheritance tax first and ensuring the nephew received the legacy, the executor fulfilled the duties effectively. - E. No, the executor is personally liable for any shortfall in the estate's funds for debt repayment, as the estate's assets were mismanaged.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is C. Under section 34 and Schedule 1, Part II of the Administration of Estates Act 1925, executors are required to settle all debts and liabilities of the estate before distributing any specific legacies. Specifically, Section 34 of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 outlines the order in which debts and liabilities must be paid: funeral, testamentary, and administration expenses; debts owed to creditors, including inheritance tax; any remaining liabilities. The executor should have ensured that all the estate's debts were fully settled using the estate's liquidity and assets before distributing specific gifts such as the painting to the nephew. By distributing the painting before settling all debts, the executor breached the duty. Thus, the estate's assets were not managed in accordance with the statutory requirements. Option A is incorrect because according to the Administration of Estates Act 1925, executors must settle all debts and liabilities of the estate before distributing any specific legacies. Therefore, by distributing the painting before all debts were settled, the executor did not fulfill the legal obligations. Option B is incorrect because it suggests that the executor should have sold the painting specifically. While the painting could have been sold to cover debts, the decision about which assets to liquidate lies with the executor, provided that all debts are settled before distributing any specific legacies. The critical point is that all debts must be settled first, not necessarily that the painting had to be sold. Option D is incorrect because executors must settle all the estate's debts (including but not limited to inheritance tax) before distributing any specific legacies. The executor did not fulfill the duties effectively because the painting was distributed to the nephew before ensuring all the debts were paid. Option E is incorrect because while the executor did mismanage the estate by not settling all debts before distributing the painting, and could be personally liable for any shortfall in the estate's funds due to mismanagement according to the Administration of Estates Act 1925, this is not the primary issue. The main problem is that the duty was breached by not following the proper order of settlement and distribution as required by law.

## Question 4 An acclaimed artist established a trust to manage an extensive art collection. The artist granted a friend a right to select any piece from the collection to keep upon the artist's death. The rest of the collection is to be donated to a national art museum according to the terms of the trust. The friend has always admired a particular sculpture within this collection. Upon the artist's death, what will happen regarding the friend's right to select a piece from the collection? - A. The friend must purchase the piece at its appraised value for it to be excluded from the museum donation. - B. The friend's right to select a piece is void as it contradicts the principle aim of the trust to donate the art to a museum. - C. The sculpture the friend admires will automatically be allocated to the friend, followed by the remaining collection's transfer to the museum. - D. The trust will terminate upon the artist's death, and the entire collection will form part of the personal estate. - E. If the friend decides not to select the sculpture, it will form part of what is donated to the museum.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is C. Upon the artist's death, the friend has the right to select a piece from the collection, which in this case is the sculpture admired. This right was granted by the trust established by the artist, so the specific piece becomes the friend's property, and the rest of the collection will be donated to the museum as per the trust's terms. Option A is incorrect because there is no requirement mentioned for the friend to purchase the piece; the trust grants the right to select a piece as a bequest. Option B is incorrect because the trust explicitly provides for the friend's right to select a piece from the collection, which does not void the primary aim of the trust but is an integral part of its terms. Option D is incorrect because the trust does not terminate upon the artist's death; rather, its specific conditions are to be fulfilled, which include both the friend's selection and the donation to the museum. Option E is incorrect because once the friend exercises the right to select, that piece is excluded from the donation regardless of the ultimate decision. The focus here is on the legal right to choose, as per the trust's terms.

## Question 5 Two individuals co-owned a piece of land as beneficial joint tenants, where they operated a successful organic farm. One co-owner, passionate about environmental conservation, wanted to ensure that in the event of death, that co-owner's share of the land and business would go to an environmental charity. This wish was outlined in a new will but no legal steps were taken to sever the joint tenancy. The co-owner who made the will passed away unexpectedly shortly after making it. Under these circumstances, can the environmental charity claim the deceased co-owner's share of the land and business? - A. Yes, because the will clearly directs the share to go to the charity. - B. Yes, but only if the surviving co-owner agrees to honor the deceased's wishes. - C. No, because the principle of survivorship means the share automatically passes to the surviving joint tenant. - D. No, unless the charity can prove the deceased's intent to sever the joint tenancy during the lifetime. - E. Yes, if the charity was significantly involved in the farm's activities during the deceased's lifetime.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is C. The principle of survivorship in a joint tenancy stipulates that the deceased's share of the land and business automatically transfers to the surviving joint tenant, without regard for the wishes stated in the will. Option A is incorrect because the provisions of a will do not have precedence over the automatic transfer of property rights that occurs in a beneficial joint tenancy due to the right of survivorship. Option B is incorrect since the surviving co-owner's agreement is not relevant to the legal principle of survivorship governing joint tenancies; the transfer of the deceased's share is automatic. Option D is incorrect because without any legal action taken to sever the joint tenancy, just the intention alone, expressed in the will, is insufficient to alter the outcome determined by the right of survivorship. Option E is incorrect because the involvement of the charity in the farm's activities during the deceased's lifetime has no impact on the legal principles governing the transfer of property in a joint tenancy scenario.

## Question 6 A renowned artist recently experienced a significant health scare that led the artist to reconsider the legacy to leave behind. The artist has voiced to friends the desire to allocate a substantial part of the estate to a foundation that supports emerging artists. However, the artist has also exhibited signs of short-term memory loss and has moments of disorientation about current dates and times. Despite this, the artist has shown a clear understanding of the estate's extent and the nature of the bequest to the foundation during discussions with a solicitor. Based on the principles outlined in the Banks v Goodfellow test, what is the most crucial factor the solicitor needs to consider when assessing the artist's testamentary capacity to draft a new will? - A. Whether the memory loss and disorientation significantly impact the artist's understanding of the will's nature. - B. Whether the artist has a detailed plan for which specific artworks and assets to include in the bequest. - C. Whether the artist's friends agree with the decision to support the foundation through this bequest. - D. Whether the foundation has officially acknowledged the artist's intention to leave them a substantial bequest. - E. Whether the artist's existing will provisions are significantly altered by the proposed new bequest.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is A. The solicitor must closely assess whether the artist's short-term memory loss and disorientation significantly impair the understanding of the will's nature and effects. Following the Banks v Goodfellow test, for the artist to have the testamentary capacity, the artist must possess a sound mind, memory, and understanding to comprehend the act engaged in, the extent of the estate, and the claims to which effect ought to be given. Option B is incorrect because while having a detailed plan for the bequest is important for drafting the will, it does not directly correlate with the legal standard for testamentary capacity, which is more concerned with the testator's general understanding of the estate and the nature of the bequest. Option C is incorrect because the agreement or approval of the artist's friends has no legal standing in assessing testamentary capacity. Option D is incorrect because the foundation's acknowledgment of the artist's intention does not affect the capacity to make a valid will. Option E is incorrect because the extent to which the new will alters existing provisions does not directly impact the assessment of testamentary capacity; it is the artist's understanding and intention that are paramount.

## Question 7 A testator devised a will in 2020, leaving a cherished collection of rare books, valued at £200,000, to a close friend. The testator, an avid collector, acquired these books over decades. However, to settle a considerable debt in 2022, the testator was compelled to auction the collection, which then garnered £270,000. The testator passed away in 2023 without making any revisions to the will post-auction. What is the effect on the bequest to the friend following the testator's death? - A. The friend is entitled to receive £270,000, the proceeds from the sale of the rare book collection. - B. The friend receives an equivalent portion of the testator's estate that matches the initial valuation of the books. - C. The bequest lapses, and the friend receives nothing due to the absence of the specific items in the estate. - D. The friend is entitled to other items from the estate with a value equal to the book collection at the time of the testator's death. - E. A constructive trust is enacted for the friend to claim the books from the auction buyer.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is C. The bequest lapses, and the friend receives nothing due to the absence of the specific items in the estate because of ademption, which occurs when a specific gift noted in a will no longer exists at the testator's death. In Re Slater [1907] 1 Ch 665, it was established that when a specific item gifted in a will is no longer part of the estate at the testator's death, the gift fails, and the beneficiary does not receive a substitute gift or compensation unless the will specifies otherwise. Option A is incorrect because under the principle of ademption, the friend is not entitled to the sale proceeds since the specific bequest of the books is no longer part of the estate. Option B is incorrect because the doctrine of ademption stipulates the failure of the bequest entirely; beneficiaries do not receive value equivalent to the failed bequest from the remainder of the estate. Option D is incorrect because the estate law does not allow for substitution of adempted bequests with other assets of equivalent value. Option E is incorrect because ademption does not lead to the creation of a constructive trust over the sold assets; constructive trusts are applied differently.

## Question 8 A business owner, having no immediate family, owns a valuable antique shop with a business partner. They had purchased the shop as an investment, though they had not explicitly discussed the details of succession. Wanting to leave the share of the business to a close friend, to whom the owner feels indebted, the business owner considers options to ensure that the wishes are followed upon death. Which of the following would be the most effective step for the business owner to ensure the share of the antique shop is inherited by the friend? - A. Leave the situation unchanged, as the share will automatically pass to the friend through operation of law. - B. Draft a legally binding agreement with the partner outlining the succession of the share to the friend. - C. Sever the business partnership to hold the share in the shop as a sole proprietor going forward. - D. Sever the joint tenancy and draft a will specifying the friend as beneficiary of the shop share. - E. Negotiate with the partner to buy them out and leave the entire shop to the friend in a will.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is D. By severing the joint tenancy, the business owner ensures that the share of the business is treated as a separate asset that will be included in the estate upon death, rather than automatically passing to the business partner through the right of survivorship. This change can usually be done through a written notice to the business partner or a mutual agreement. Further, the business owner needs to draft a will that specifically states the intention for the friend to inherit the share of the business. This legal document will ensure that the wishes are followed after death. Option A is incorrect because without an explicit declaration, such as a will and or a severance of the business arrangement into a different form that allows for specific bequests, the share may not automatically pass to the friend, especially in the absence of a legal family relationship or other arrangements. Option B is incorrect because, while drafting an agreement with the business partner is a good step, it is not sufficient on its own to ensure the friend inherits the share because the right of survivorship would still apply. The joint tenancy needs to be severed. Option C is incorrect because, while severing the joint tenancy in the property changes the manner in which the property is held and does not dissolve the partnership itself, this step alone does not ensure that the friend inherits the share. Steps would still need to be taken to ensure the share passes to the friend, such as drafting a will. Option E is incorrect since buying out the business partner does not directly affect the succession of the share to the friend upon death without a will specifying the friend as the beneficiary. It is a more complicated step that might not align with either party's interests or intentions.

## Question 9 A solicitor is preparing a will for a retired professor who wishes to bequeath assets. The professor recently suffered a mild stroke, leading to occasional confusion. Given the vital importance of ensuring the professor has the requisite testamentary capacity, the solicitor contemplates the appropriate legal measure to ascertain this. Which legal principle should the solicitor rely on to determine if the professor has the necessary testamentary capacity to formulate the will? - A. The Mental Health Act 1983 criteria. - B. The Banks v Goodfellow criterion. - C. The Clear Capacity Concept. - D. The Adult Capacity Act 2005 guideline. - E. The Testamentary Discretion Standard.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is B. The Banks v Goodfellow criterion is the correct legal principle for assessing testamentary capacity in England and Wales. It requires that a testator understands the nature of the act and its effects, the extent of the property of which they are disposing, the claims to which they ought to give effect, and no disorder of the mind that perverts their sense of right or prevents the exercise of their natural faculties in disposing of their property by will. Option A is incorrect because the Mental Health Act 1983 predominantly deals with the treatment and care of individuals with mental disorders, rather than assessing testamentary capacity. Option C is incorrect because there is no legally recognized 'Clear Capacity Concept' specific to testamentary capacity. It is a fabricated term for the purpose of this question. Option D is incorrect because while the Adult Capacity Act 2005 pertains to Scotland and deals with individuals' ability to make decisions, it does not specifically set out the criteria for testamentary capacity in England and Wales. Option E is incorrect because 'The Testamentary Discretion Standard' does not exist as a recognized legal criterion for assessing testamentary capacity within the jurisdiction of England and Wales.

## Question 10 A testator's will contains a clause stating, 'I leave £10,000 to my friend for the care of my Persian cat.' At the time of the testator's passing, the cat had been rehomed with another friend due to the testator's declining health, and the intended beneficiary was unaware of this change. Given the testator's inability to update the will following the cat's rehoming, what happens to the £10,000 bequeathed for the cat's care? - A. The beneficiary receives the £10,000 as intended, regardless of the cat's rehoming. - B. The £10,000 gift lapses because the condition concerning the cat's care can no longer be fulfilled. - C. The beneficiary is entitled to half of the £10,000 since the cat was rehomed before the testator's death. - D. The beneficiary must use the £10,000 for the care of another Persian cat, if agreed upon by the estate's executors. - E. The £10,000 is redirected to the testator's estate for division according to the residue clause in the will.

Click to reveal answer

The correct answer is B. The bequest lapses because its specific purpose, the care of the cat, cannot be fulfilled due to the cat's rehoming prior to the testator's death, leaving the beneficiary without entitlement to the £10,000 under the stated conditions. Option A is incorrect because the purpose of the £10,000—the cat's care—is no longer applicable, thus negating the beneficiary's entitlement under the specific terms of the will. Option C is incorrect because the will's provisions do not allow for a partial fulfillment of the conditions based on the cat's status. The entire gift fails if its condition cannot be met. Option D is incorrect as there is no suggestion in the testator's will that the money should be used for any other purpose than caring for the cat. Decisions about alternative uses of the bequest are not made at the discretion of the estate's executors without direct provision in the will. Option E is incorrect because while the specific bequest for the cat's care lapses, redirecting these funds to the estate's residue requires an absence of alternate directions in the will, which is not indicated in the provided scenario.

SQE1 FLK2 Wills and the Administration of Estates Sample Questions July 2024