The Vulnerable Beneficiary and the Family Provision Claim
Mr. E dies leaving a will that divides his £900,000 estate equally between his two adult children from a first marriage. His second wife, W, aged 78, married him 22 years ago and was financially dependent on him; under the will she receives nothing, and the matrimonial home was in Mr. E's sole name. W has modest savings of £40,000 and a small pension of £9,000 per year. Mr. E's will contains a clause stating 'I make no provision for my wife as she has her own money.' One child, C1, is disabled and relies on state benefits. W wishes to challenge the will. The estate has been administered to the point of distribution but not yet distributed.
1. Advise W on her claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, including eligibility, time limits and the court's approach.
Read the worked answer
Eligibility. W is the surviving spouse of the deceased and is within s.1(1)(a) - a spouse or civil partner. She is eligible regardless of the will's terms.
Time limit. A claim must be brought within six months of the grant of representation (s.4), unless the court extends time. As the estate is not yet distributed but a grant has issued, W must act urgently; delay risks the six-month deadline and, once distributed, the protection in s.20 (protection of PRs distributing without notice).
The court's approach. The court asks whether the will makes reasonable financial provision for the applicant. For a spouse, the standard is what is reasonable for a spouse to receive, not merely maintenance (s.1(2)(a)) - a higher standard than for other applicants. The court considers the s.3 factors: the applicant's financial needs and resources, the beneficiaries' needs, the deceased's obligations and responsibilities, the size of the estate, and any relevant conduct.
Likely outcome. The will's exclusion clause is not decisive. W's dependence, age, and the fact that the home was in Mr. E's sole name point strongly to a claim. The court is likely to award a life interest or a capital sum sufficient to rehouse her, or a share of the estate. C1's disability and benefit dependence are relevant to the beneficiaries' needs and will be weighed, but do not automatically defeat a spouse's claim.
2. C1 objects that any award to W will reduce C1's inheritance and that C1's disability makes the current will 'reasonable'. Assess this argument and the practical steps.
Read the worked answer
C1's argument is a relevant factor but not a complete answer. Under s.3(1), the court must have regard to the financial needs and resources of the beneficiaries, including C1's disability and benefit dependence. However, the deceased's obligation to his spouse of 22 years - particularly where she is elderly and the home was in his sole name - is a powerful counterweight. The court balances needs; a spouse's claim for reasonable provision generally ranks highly, and the court may structure an award (e.g. a life interest in the property, or a capital sum) to preserve capital for the children on W's death.
Practical steps. (i) W should issue her claim promptly and before distribution; (ii) she should seek a standstill or an undertaking from the PRs not to distribute; (iii) she should gather evidence of the marriage, dependence, and her financial position; (iv) consider mediation - family provision claims are commonly settled; (v) C1 should be joined as a defendant/beneficiary and may wish to advance his own needs evidence. The PRs should not distribute until the claim is resolved or time expires, to avoid personal liability under s.20.