Cowan v Foreman
The court can extend the six month time limit for a claim for reasonable provision where the delay was caused by reasonable negotiations, as it has a wide discretion.
Facts
Mr Cowan died leaving a large estate, mostly on discretionary trusts of which his widow, Mrs Cowan, was a beneficiary. Her lawyers did not issue a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 within six months of the grant of probate, because they were negotiating with the trustees and agreed a standstill. When negotiations failed, she issued a claim and asked for permission to bring it out of time. The judge refused permission.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal allowed her appeal and granted permission. Asplin LJ said that the court has an unfettered discretion to extend time, to be exercised judicially, considering all the circumstances, including the reason for the delay, whether the claim has real prospects of success, and any prejudice to the beneficiaries. It was legitimate for parties to engage in negotiation, and a standstill agreement could be a good reason for delay. The policy of encouraging settlement meant that the claim should not be shut out.
Related cases on cohabitants, family property and family provision
- Re Besterman (Deceased) [1984] Ch 458
- Burns v Burns [1984] Ch 317
- Re Coventry (Deceased) [1980] Ch 461
- Curran v Collins [2015] EWCA Civ 404
- Eves v Eves [1975] 1 WLR 1338
- Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd [2001] 1 AC 27
- Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30, [2004] 2 AC 557
- Gow v Grant [2012] UKSC 29, 2013 SC (UKSC) 1
Studying family law? 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.
