Barrett v Bem
A will signed by another person guiding the testator's hand was not signed by the testator's direction, because there must be positive evidence of a direction by the testator, not merely his acquiescence.
Facts
Mr Barrett made a will shortly before his death while he was a patient in hospital, leaving his estate to his sister. He was very weak, and his sister, who was a beneficiary, helped him to sign the will by guiding his hand. Two witnesses signed the will. The will was challenged by other members of the family, on the ground that it had not been signed by the testator or by another person in his presence and by his direction, as required by section 9 of the Wills Act 1837.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that the will was invalid. Lord Neuberger MR said that, where a will is signed by another person on behalf of the testator, there must be positive and clear evidence that the testator directed the other person to sign on his behalf, and mere acquiescence or passive submission was not enough. The evidence showed that the signature had been made by the sister, who was the main beneficiary, and that there was no positive direction by the testator. The court said that particular care is needed where a will is signed on behalf of the testator by a beneficiary.
Related cases on formalities, execution, undue influence and rectification
- Re Bravda [1968] 1 WLR 479
- Re Colling [1972] 1 WLR 1440
- Hall v Hall (1868) LR 1 P & D 481
- Marley v Rawlings [2014] UKSC 2, [2015] AC 129
- Wingrove v Wingrove (1885) 11 PD 81
- Wood v Smith [1993] Ch 90
Studying wills, succession and probate? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
