Litigation & dispute resolution news

Credit industry warned over court action
29 June 2010

Assets must not be hidden from creditors
29 June 2010

Double award success for B P Collins
8 June 2010

Triple success for new partners at B P Collins
5 May 2010

Corporate manslaughter trial postponed
4 March 2010

Cabin crew in court over contract disputes
4 February 2010

Shah & another v Joshi [2008] EWHC 1766 (Ch) | Contesting a Will

01 July 2008



B P Collins successfully acted for Mr Shah in relation to his late mother's estate. Mr Shah was concerned that a document purporting to be the last will and testament of his mother and leaving the vast majority of her estate to her daughter (Mrs Joshi) was not a valid will.

On the face of it, it appeared that the will had been executed less than four weeks before his mother died, when she was in a frail and infirm condition. The will represented a stark departure from an earlier will, which left the majority of the estate to Mr Shah.

The principle asset in the estate was a two-thirds share in a property, in which the deceased lived with Mr Shah and his family. Mr Shah owned the remaining one-third.

The will was written in English although the deceased spoke only Gujarati. Mr Shah said his mother was illiterate and yet the will contained no attestation clause, confirming that it had been read to the deceased and translated for her.

Mr Shah challenged the validity of the will, arguing that the signature on the will was a forgery and that even if it was not a forgery, his mother did not know and approve the content of the will (which also included a consideration of her testamentary capacity).

Mr Shah also sought directions from the Court in relation to a proposed Inheritance Act claim on the basis that if the will was found to be valid, then it failed to make reasonable financial provision for him and his family.

The effect of the new will could have been to effectively make Mr Shah's family homeless. If the will was found to be valid, Mr Shah's intention was to issue his Inheritance Act claim after the validity proceedings, as and when a grant was issued.

The six-day trial, heard by Mr John Randall QC, included evidence from handwriting experts (regarding the signature on the will), evidence from an expert on Gujarati custom and practice and medical evidence in relation to the deceased's capacity and state of mind at around the time the will was said to have been prepared and executed.

The Judge found that the signature on the will was indeed a forgery and that even if the deceased had signed the will, she could not have known and approved its contents.

The legal team:
Tim Constable, partner, litigation and dispute resolution
Craig Williams, senior associate, litigation and dispute resolution
Leticia Jennings, associate, litigation and dispute resolution

© Copyright