Ingram and Whitfield v Abraham [2023] EWHC 1982 (Ch)

The High Court handed down judgment on 3 August 2023 in the case of Ingram and Whitfield v Abraham [2023] EWHC 1982 (Ch). John Dickinson, instructed by Clarke Willmott LLP, acted for the successful claimants in their challenge, which was based on want of knowledge and approval against the purported last Will of Joanna Abraham dated 8 August 2019. By that 2019 Will Joanna would have left her estate to her brother Simon Abraham, the first defendant, and her book collection would have been left to the first defendant’s wife Hilary. This 2019 Will left nothing to Joanna’s two children Henrietta and Tom, the claimants. Joanna’s previous Will, executed in 2008, had left her estate to be divided equally between Henrietta and Tom.

Joanna had asked Simon, the first defendant, to prepare a Will for her. He used an online will kit. Simon’s case was that Joanna had given clear instructions to leave her estate to him and her books to Hilary, he read the Will to her which was simple in its terms, sent her copies of the Will by both email and post, delivered a bound version of the Will for her to sign, she had the Will read to her and she read it herself in front of her lodger, who gave evidence about this. Joanna had her lodger and a neighbour witness her signature. Simon asserted that Joanna had retained the signed Will. Henrietta and Tom raised numerous matters as suspicious circumstances, assisted by voice recordings of Joanna made before the 2019 Will was executed, and by social media messages from before and after the 2019 Will.

The judgment of HHJ Berkley, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, included a finding that Joanna had not understood the effect of the 2019 Will and that Simon had contributed to that misunderstanding. Joanna had wanted Simon to receive her estate in order to divide it out between Henrietta and Tom. Simon’s credibility was damaged by inconsistencies within his evidence, his failure to disclose his own and Joanna’s mobile phones, and issues with the credibility of the witnesses he called to support his case over the alleged reasons for Joanna disinheriting her children and the circumstances of the preparation and execution of the 2019 Will.

The case is noteworthy for providing a careful analysis of how to apply to the test for want of knowledge and approval in Gill v Woodall [2011] Ch 380 and related case law.

Download judgment here.

You can also find a detailed summary on the Lexis Nexis website here.