Hentys Wills and Estate Glossary
The term ‘Adequate Provision for Proper Maintenance and Support’ is considered relative to each individual’s circumstance. In order to determine whether adequate provision has been made, the court will consider the terms ‘adequate’ and ‘proper’ in relation to the applicant’s situation. E.g. if the child of a wealthy mother has not been awarded as much as she would have expected from her estate, she may be able to contest the will. Even if the daughter has been awarded a lower sum that will ‘adequately’ cover her necessities, this amount may not be sufficient to ensure her ‘proper’ maintenance. The adequacy of the provision that has been made is not decided in isolation but rather is determined by considering whether the applicant has been given enough to live comfortably, in the lifestyle that they are accustomed to.
The terms ‘adequate’ and ‘proper’ are therefore considered in the context of:
- The age, sex, condition, lifestyle and situation of the applicant
- The applicant’s needs and the resources they require for meeting those needs
- The nature, extent and character of the estate and other claims upon it
- What the will-maker regarded as superior claims or preferable dispositions
Ademption occurs when property (either real or person) that is gifted under a Will fails because it no longer exists upon death of the testator. The term comes from the latin word ‘ademption’ meaning ‘a taking away’, as the property has literally been ‘taken away’ previously.
A classic example is where the testator’s main residence has been bequeathed to a child in the Will, but the main residence has been subsequently sold during the lifetime to fund the bond for an aged care facility. Accordingly, the specific gift has been ‘adeemed’, so the gift fails.
Another example is where the property has substantially changed from how it was described in the Will. I.e. if the Will refers to shares in that company, but that company has been taken over by a different company, it also falls foul to the ademption rule.
The assumption stands that if a specific gift of an item of property does not exist upon the testator’s death, then the testator had the intention that the beneficiary of that specific gift is to receive nothing in its place. Thus, ademption can lead to instances of unfair outcomes and often requires a Part IV application to ensure the person is still adequately provided for.
In Victoria, ademption as a principle is not ruled by statutes such as the Wills Act 1997 (Vic) or the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic). Instead, it is part of the common law. To determine whether ademption has occurred, the Court is required to ask two questions:
- Is the gift a specific or general gift?
- If it is a specific gift, is the gifted property still in the Estate at the date of death?
A specific gift is something which has been described in a way that separates it from other assets disposed of within the Will. For example – the property of 125, Wills Street, Victoria 3000; or, “my car”.
A general gift is usually a specific “value” which will be paid by the executor out of the estate. For example, an amount of money.
If the gift is specific, and no longer part of the Estate because it has been disposed of by one way or another, the gift fails; the beneficiary receives nothing and cannot receive the cash equivalent of the gifted property.
Unlike many other aspects of Will interpretation, this rule is clear and unforgiving. The Courts do not look at it on a case-by-case basis. It is simply based on the notion that the will-maker intended for the beneficiary to receive nothing because they were aware that once disposed of, the specific gift no longer forms part of the estate.
There are however exceptions to the rule:
Exception 1: Ademption rule will not apply when the property is disposed of by a wrongful act of a third party
These are cases where an unauthorised or otherwise fraudulent act has lead to the disposition of property without the knowledge of the will-maker. A prime example here is where a power of attorney sells a property, but the conditions for the exercise of this power have not been met.
Exception 2: Ademption rule will not apply when the property is lawfully sold on behalf of a will-maker by an administrator (guardian) of an estate as appointed by VCAT – Section 53 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1986 (Vic).
Where a VCAT appointed administrator is making decision, the person on whose behalf they are acting has usually lost the capacity to make a Will. As a result, the will-maker does not have the capacity to change their will to reflect the new circumstance, and in some circumstances may even be completely unaware of the sale. Thus, the statutory allows for the beneficiary to have the same interest in any money or other property arising from or received in respect of any sale, mortgage, exchange etc should the property not have been subject to the sale, mortgage, exchange etc.
Exception 3: Ademption rule will not apply when the property is lawfully sold on behalf of a will-maker by an administrator or person acting under an enduring power of attorney *uncertain*.
It has been suggested that a similar provision to s 53 of the Guardianship and Administration Act be introduced for persons acting under an enduring power of attorney. Traditionally, under the common law, the actions of financial attorneys are not considered an exception to the ademption rule. However, in recent years Victorian judges have recognised such exception, and called for legislative reform to clarify the issue – see Simpson v Cunning  VSC 466.
A deceased’s assets are anything they own at their date of death. However, not every asset can be disposed of within a Will. As a broad rule of thumb – assets which can be disposed of via a Will (estate assets) include anything the deceased has sole ownership over, such as; real or personal property, business ownership, digital assets and intellectual property. Assets which cannot be disposed of via a Will (non-estate assets) are things that the deceased does not have legal ownership over, or has joint ownership with another party. Examples of such include discretionary/family trusts, company assets, life insurance and superannuation.
Attestation or Attestation Clause
The signature clause in a Will.
A beneficiary in a Will is someone/something who/which has been listed in a Will to ‘benefit’ from the deceased’s estate. For an example, the deceased may have left real property, cash or a family heirloom to one or multiple individuals or organisations, making them a beneficiary.
Bequests is the name for the testator’s wishes outlined in the Will. There are four key types of bequests that can be made;
- Fractional: A certain percentage of the testator’s estate is awarded to the charity, organisation or individual.
- Pecuniary: A specific gift is nominated. This could include a sum of money, stocks, property or shares.
- Residual: Once the testator’s other gifts have been allocated and any legal fees paid, the remainder of the estate is left to the recipients.
- Whole Estate: The testator’s entire estate and assets are bequeathed to one beneficiary.
This is a principle arising out of the case of Neville v Benjamin  1 CH 723 which enables the executors/administrators of the estate to seek a declaration from the Court on who should benefit from the Estate when they cannot locate beneficiaries. The problem is that unless the Court orders the personal representatives to be at liberty to distribute the Estate, they cannot finalise its administration and all other beneficiaries do not receive what they are entitled to.
Accordingly, a ‘Benjamin Order’ is made by the Court which allows the personal representative to start distributing even though the personal representative is not certain of who really should be benefiting. Once this declaration is made, the personal representative is no longer liable if they distribute the Estate to whom they believe are the correct beneficiaries, even if more entitled beneficiaries are subsequently discovered.
Following remarriage(s) and after a divorce this is where a family is formed by a combination of two or more families.
Capital Gains Tax (CGT)
CGT is a tax levied form the profit from the sale of a property or an investment. This means that if you inherit a dwelling or other property and later sell it CGT will apply unless an exemption applies.
The same applies if the executor of administrator of the Estate sells the deceased’s property as part of winding up the Estate assets.
The exemptions are dependent on when the deceased acquired the property, when they died and whether the property had previously been used to produce any sort of income (such as rent).
See the blog on CGT for the exemption situations.
As established in the case of Calderbank v Calderbank, a ‘Calderbank Offer’ is an offer (usually in writing) that represents a genuine attempt to resolves the dispute. Importantly, the offer must state “without prejudice save as to costs”. This means that the offer cannot be used as evidence in any proceeding, and is without prejudice to the party’s right to continue litigation. The exception regarding costs means that if the offer is rejected and the case proceeds to judgement then the offer can be relied upon in court when determining who will pay the costs of the proceeding.
The word caveat comes from the Latin and literally means ‘let him beware’. Thus broadly, a caveat is classified as a legal notice to a court or public officer to suspend a certain proceeding until the notifier is given a hearing. In a Will dispute, a probate caveat is a document that is filed in court to prevent probate of the Will being granted because the plaintiffs want to challenge the validity of the Will. After a probate caveat is filed, the proposed executors of the estate cannot administer the assets until (1) it has been decided by the Court that the proposed Will is the last valid Will of the deceased, and the challenge is quashed (2) the caveat has run out or (3) it has been withdrawn by the caveator.
Challenging a Will
To challenge a Will is to dispute a Will, or to say that the Will itself should be struck out. These types of cases usually arise when the person who made the Will was suffering from a mentally degenerating disease at the time, or they were put under pressure to change their Will.
Most common challenges to a Will occur because: The will maker did not have the capacity to make the will at the time it was signed; the Will was the subject of fraud, forgery or made under the influence of others; there was an insufficiency and inappropriateness of witnesses to the signing of the Will; the Will was left unsigned.
The first step in challenging a Will is to get a probate caveat placed on the Will (see above – caveat). Once a caveat is placed on the Will it is for the plaintiff to plead the case to the courts as to why they think the Will should not be the last valid Will of the testator. If successful, the Will, will be struck out and the applicant can file for probate on a previous Will, or alternatively if there is no previous Will, the Estate would be divided in accordance with Intestacy Law.
This is a properly executed change or addition to an existing Will. It needs to be executed in accordance with the provision in the Wills Act, or may not be considered a valid alteration to the Will.
A Conditional Will is one where the inheritance depends on the occurrence of some uncertain event before it becomes operative. Although the Courts are generally reluctant to deny a person’s testamentary wishes, a conditional of a Will, will not be upheld where:
- It violates the rule of law because it is uncertain, or impossible to satisfy; or
- It is contrary to public policy.
Examples of conditions may be not marrying outside the family religion, quitting smoking, attending the funeral, having the children be baptised in a certain church etc.
See the Supreme Court of NSW case of Hickin v Carroll & Ors (No 2)  NSWSC 1059 in the blog on Conditional Wills for more information.
This is a trust formed where it is proved that the mutual intention of the deceased and the claimant was that the claimant would have some interest in the deceased’s property (whether real property, money, a car, bank account etc) and the claimant has relied upon this to their detriment.
The main features of a constructive trust are that the trust is implied by a Court, the Court determines that the owner of the asset is a constructive trustee for the benefit of the true owner, and that there is no formal trust document or agreement.
Contesting a Will
Contesting a Will refers to the making of a ‘Family Provision’, Part IV or ‘Testators Family Maintenance List’ claim. It is an application to the Court to seek further adequate provision from the Estate of a deceased person.
Deed of Family Arrangement
A written agreement to record the distribution of the Estate where all beneficiaries in the will/potential claimants agree to not distribute in accordance with the Will of the deceased person. This usually occurs where the beneficiaries wish to rearrange the distribution of the Estate between themselves so to settle an imminent and potential Part IV – Family Provision Claim against the Estate.
Another word for bequeath.
A domestic partner under the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) is someone who has:
- Been living with the deceased at the time of their death, as a couple on a genuine domestic basis; and
- Either had lived with the deceased in that manner for a period of at least 2 years immediately before the person’s death; or
- Is the parent of a child with the deceased who was under the age of 18 at the time of their death.
You need to prove these elements in order to be considered eligible to contest a Will. However, this definition is not clear cut. Some other factors assessed include the financial position of the applicant, the size of the Estate, the sexual relationship between the applicant and the deceased, competing interests of others and the conduct of the partner before and during the litigation process.
See the blog on proving a De Facto relationship for a case study of Bell v Barley  VSC 24 which is a perfect exactly of what evidence is required to prove a ‘genuine domestic relationship’.
Elder Financial Abuse (EFA)
As defined by the World Health Organisation, EFA is “any illegal or immoral exploitation or use of the funds or resources of the older person”. This is most commonly demonstrated in the form of asking for loans/loan guarantees which are never paid back, forgery of signatures, misuse of enduring powers of attorney, using an older person’s property to obtain a mortgage or finance, misrepresentation or just plain manipulation.
- The spouse or domestic partner at the time of death;
- Child of the deceased (including an adopted or step-child or someone who believed the deceased to be their parent and was treated as such) who, at the time of death, was:
- Under the age of 18;
- A full-time student under the age of 25;
- Suffering from a disability
- A former spouse or former domestic partner of the deceased if the person, at the time of the deceased’s death would have been able to make proceedings under the Family Law Act 1975 Cth; and has either
- Not taken those proceedings; or
- Commenced but not finalised those proceedings because of the death of the deceased
- A child or step child of the deceased not referred to above (i.e adult children);
- A registered caring partner;
- A grandchild;
- The spouse or domestic partner of a child (i.e. son or daughter in law) of the deceased where that child has died within one year of the deceased’s death;
- A person who was or had been (and was likely to be in the near future) a member of the deceased’s household.
It is important to note that siblings and parents are not considered eligible people just based of their relation.
The person who is appointed to make lifestyle, health and medical decisions on the behalf of an individual who is no longer capable of making these decisions alone.
All the property owned by a person at the time of their death. This includes both real and personal property.
Estates in Fee Simple
A legal term denoting real property/real estate. It represents absolute ownership of land, and therefore the owner of that land may do whatever he or she chooses with the land.
Estoppel is a legal principle which prevents or stops a party from acting in a way that is inconsistent with their prior action or conduct. There are two types of estopped – promissory and proprietary.
An executor (male), executrix (female) is the person named in a Will who is to carry out the wishes of the deceased after they have passed. It is a large responsibility, and if the Will is challenged or contested it is the job of the executor to defend the Will. An executor named in the Will is under no obligation to accept the responsibility. Instead, if a substituted executor has also been named, the duties can be delegated to them and the original executor will be exempt from all obligations. If no other executor is named, then an application to the Court can be made to appoint an administrator.
Family Provision Claim
A Family Provision Claim also known as Part IV claim or Testator’s Family Maintenance (TFM) claims are launched when an eligible person feels they have not adequately been provided for under the Will. To do so successfully, the eligible person first needs to prove that the deceased had a moral duty to provide for their proper maintenance and support (e.g. that they were maintained by them at some point in time), and then they need to prove that the distribution of the deceased’s estate as set out in the Will, or pursuant to the rules of intestacy fails to make adequate provision for the proper maintenance and support.
Is a rule governed by the common law which prevents a person who has unlawfully killed another form inheriting from their victim or acquiring another financial benefit from the death. It has no statutory basis in Victoria but is nevertheless a well-established rule of public policy which override any words of a Will or other legally binding agreements to which the deceased person was party.
Ultimately, the effect of the rule means that one cannot murder their parents or spouse and still expect to inherit. The leading case comes from the English and Wales Court of Appeal – Cleaver v Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association . See the blog on the forfeiture rule for the case study.
Inheritance tax refers to the rage of taxes that may be payable by a person who is a beneficiary in a Will. However, in Australia there is no inheritance tax or death duties imposed. All states in Australia abolished death duties in 1979.
An insolvent Estate is one where the person has died with an insufficient amount of assets to pay all the deceased’s creditors. I.e., the deceased person had debts in excess of the value of their estate. In such cases, the potential beneficiaries will be excluded from the provision as the executor needs to use whatever remaining funds available to pay off the deceased’s respective creditors.
An informal Will is a document which does not comply with the formalities listed in the Wills Act 1997 (Vic) which makes a document a valid Will. These include: The Will maker must have attained the age of 18 years to make a valid Will (with a few exceptions); the Will, in writing must be signed by the Will maker or by some other person in the presence of and at the direction of the Will maker; the signature must be made with the Will maker’s intention to make the Will; the Will maker must sign the Will in the presence of two witnesses present at the same time; and, the two witnesses must sign the Will in the presence of the Will maker (but not necessarily in the presence of each other).
Just because a Will is informal, it does not mean that it cannot be admitted to probate as the final Will of the deceased. If the Court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the deceased had testamentary capacity at the time and intended that the document be his or her Will, then it will be considered the testator’s last Will and Testament for all intents and purposes.
See blog on Informal Wills for informal Will case studies on computer wills and a text message.
Inter vivos gift
Gift(s)/property (real or otherwise) given during the life time of the testator. This term becomes especially relevant when an item of property has been bequeathed to an individual under the Will, but was already given to another individual “inter vivos”. Accordingly, the ademption rule applies and that gift no longer forms part of the testator’s estate
Intestacy occurs if there is no Will, or an earlier Will has been revoked without a new one being made. The deceased is said to have died ‘intestate’. In such circumstances, the Estate will pass to the next of kin in accordance with statutory order as directed by the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic). Intestacy can come in two forms – total intestacy or partial intestacy. In the latter form, although a Will may exist detailing the distribution of part of the deceased’s estate, the remainder has been left in a sort of limbo and therefore needs to be distributed in accordance with the statutory order.
At current the statutory order is as follows: If a person died intestate and leaves one partner without a child of the intestate, the partner receives 100% of the Estate. If that person dies and leaves a partner and children, the partner receives the first $451,909, all chattels and 50% of the residuary. The other 50% is to be divided equally among the children. If the intestate leaves multiple partners without any children. The partners receive 100% to be divided either by agreement or a Distribution Order. If the intestate left multiple partners and children, the partners divide the chattels, first $451,909 and 50% of the residuary by agreement or Distribution Order and then the remaining 50% is to be divided between the children. If none of those circumstances apply there is then a hierarchical chain. Beginning with the children of the intestate to share in the entirety of the Estate, then it moves to the parents, siblings, grandparents, uncles/aunties and cousins and finally if there is no family the Crown will take the entirety of the Estate.
Letters of Administration
Letters of administration is intestacy’s version of probate. The Supreme Court will make a Grant of Administration and appoint an administrator to dispose of the deceased’s assets, just as an executor would once probate has been granted. To apply for letters of administration, the person must be the deceased’s closest next of kin in the following order: Lawful spouse or domestic partner, children (excluded step children), grandchildren, parents, siblings.
These are the debts that a deceased person owes at the time of their death. All liabilities must be listed in the Inventory of Assets and Liabilities.
Pursuant to s 99 of the Act, you have strictly 6 months from the date that a grant of Probate or Letters of Administration is successfully made to contest a Will. The law can be harsh in the sense that often ‘out of time’ is synonymous with being ‘out of luck’, although in some exceptional circumstances an extension of time will be granted. However, the application for an extension cannot be made after the final distribution of the Estate.
Mediation is a confidential meeting that takes place between two parties and is frequently used as an alternative to going to court when contesting or challenging a Will. It is a far more cost-effective way of resolving a dispute with the aim of reaching a mutually agreeable solution. It is an important term to understand if engaging with the team at Hentys Lawyers, as in the last 5 years not one of our Estate disputes has made its way to court, everything has been settled via this form of alternative dispute resolution.
A mediation is most commonly held face to face in a ‘conference room’ environment rather than formal court room, however it is ultimately up to the partners to determine where to meet, so long as the location is on neutral ground. It can be held either before a Registrar of the Court or a private mediator. In both circumstances, the parties’ legal representative begin by making short statements to the mediator, explaining their position. The mediator will then explain the purpose of the mediation to each of the parties, go through the costs involved if the proceeding were to progress to a hearing before a judge and generally finishes their opening by encouraging the parties to try and solve the matter then and there. The mediator is engaged as a completely independent third party and is simply present to guide the discussion and to ensure the proper process is followed, they by no means set the agenda. They remain impartial and have no authority on the decisions regarding settlement, their role ultimately is simply to encourage different viewpoints in the hope that they will reach a mutually agreeable solution.
Member of a Household
A member of a household is a person who, at the time of the deceased’s death is (or had been in the past and would have been likely in the near future, had the deceased no died, to again become) a member of the household of which the deceased was also a member.
This class of person is eligible to contest a Will pursuant to s 91 of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic)
However, a member of a household is more than simply living in the same place as the deceased. A household is a group of people who are living cohesively together as a unit or in other words a ‘faux family’ and are involved both in the runnings of the household and in each other’s lives. See the case of Russel v NSW Trustee and Guardian  NSWCA 405 for more information.
The concept of Moral Duty was first set by the Privy Council in Bosch v Perpetual Trustee Co (Ltd). “Their Lordships agree that in every case the court must place itself in the position of the testator and consider what he ought to have done in the circumstances of the case, treating the testator for the purpose as a wise and just, rather than a fond and foolish, husband or father”. The Bosh v Perpetual Trustee Co (Ltd) case demonstrated that it was not enough for the Court to take into account what a wise family member would do in specific situations, but the Court should place itself in the position of the testator and decide what should be done in light of a “moral duty”.
The concept of a moral duty was later confirmed by the High Court in Vigolo v Bostin  HCA 11, with Chief Justice Gleeson noting that the concept in relation to the Part IV provision is to be understood less as a legal right and more as a ‘moral value’.
A rule which currently applies only in NSW where the assets of the deceased are returned to the Estate upon the testator’s death, because they should not have been disposed of prior to death. This is governed by s 80 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) which permits the Court to designate property as notional estate where the deceased has entered into a “relevant property transaction” in three years prior to his or her death. To rely on this section, it also must be proved that the property was the subject of a “prescribed transaction, entered into by the deceased, specifically for the purpose of avoiding a TFM claim”. Furthermore, if the property was “gifted” to another within 12 months of the deceased dying, then it must be proved that: (1) at the time the gift was given, the deceased had a moral obligation to make adequate provision to the eligible person who is disputing the will (the applicant); and (2) the moral obligation to the applicant was greater than the moral obligation to give the gift in the first place.
Although this concept does not operation within the Victorian Legal system, it does not mean that it applies only to those who reside in NSW. Any property that is held within NSW (even if the deceased lived in Victoria), can be declared as a notional Estate.
No Win, No Fee
This means that your legal costs are not payable unless we provide a successful outcome, as at Hentys we believe that your financial position should not prevent you from achieving justice. For more on Hentys Lawyer’s No Win No Fee arrangement please click here.
Offer of Settlement
In Wills and Dispute cases, if a settlement is not reached at mediation, it is then scheduled for trial where a judge makes a decision on the dispute. Trials can be costly and lengthy, which is why in the interim between a failed mediation and the trial date, it is not uncommon for informal offers to be exchanged back and forth between both sides to try and settle before it reaches court.
These informal offers are known as ‘Calderbank Offers’, and are always made prior to judgement in a dispute, they can even be made prior to legal proceedings being commenced. See ‘Calderbank Offers’ for more information
Probate means proof of the Will. Once the Will has been proven to the satisfaction of the Court – that is, the Supreme Court (Probate Division) agrees that it is the last valid Will of the deceased, probate is granted to the executor of the Will. It authorises the executor to administer the Estate. The executor’s duties include paying debts of the estate, releasing assets and distributing those assets to the beneficiaries. A will cannot be contested until probate has been granted.
A person may be prevented from leaving someone out of their Will, if the claimant can prove that they were induced by that person into believing that they would be provided for in some way, and that person has relied on this to their detriment.
Ultimately, in these situations, equity binds the promisor to deliver on the promise, even if the promise was not supported by consideration from the promise. The key question is whether it would be unconscionable if the promise is not kept by the promisor.
This type of estoppel restricts the legal rights of landowners if they have encouraged the believe in another that he or she has some entitlement over the property, and that belief has been acted upon, usually by some alteration or improvement having been made on the land.
Real Property = Any property that is immovable, being its land and anything attached to the land. Eg Land, buildings, crops and mineral rights.
Personal Property = Any property that is moveable. Personal property is not affixed to or associated with land, and are also known as chattels. Note that personal property includes both tangible and intangible items. Tangible being furniture, vehicles etc. Intangible being stocks, bonds, intellectual property and money.
Residue of Estate
The residue includes the possession, property and money remaining after all gifts have been distributed in accordance with the Will and all debts are settled.
Superannuation does not automatically form part of a testator’s estate. This has recently been cemented by the Federal Court Decision in Stock (as Executor of the Will of Mandie, Deceased) v N.M. Superannuation Proprietary Limited  FCA 612. The case confirmed that because superannuation does not form part of a testator’s estate, it is not subject to the terms of their will; and, if there is no binding death nomination in place at the time of a testator’s death, the trustee of the fund has the discretion to decide who benefits from the testator’s super provided that the decision is ‘fair and reasonable’.
The only way for superannuation to form part of an Estate is if the trustee’s discretion is exercised in favour of the Estate, or the Estate is the pre-determined recipient under a binding nomination, or by operation of the trust deed. Where the superannuation death benefit does become an estate asset, the Will is able to deal with the death benefit in any manner the testator determines.
Superannuation Nominations (Binding & Non-Binding)
Binding and non-binding nominations fall under the category of “death benefits”. This means they help the superannuation company determine who/where to distribute the superannuation monies after the super fund holder has passed away.
A binding nomination, as the name suggests is binding, so the super fund must follow the super fund holder’s instructions and the superannuation trustee does not have any discretion as to where the payment is to go. A binding nomination has no expiry date and never needs renewing
For a non-binding nomination, the super fund is not forced to follow the super fund holder’s nomination, and they are to simply take this nomination into consideration when making the distribution. When determining who to distribute the superannuation monies to, aside from the non-binding nomination, the superannuation trustee takes into consideration; the number of dependents, the relationship between the member and each of the dependent, the level of dependency between the member and each dependent, and anything outlined in the super fund holder’s Will. A non-binding nomination must be properly document and renewed every 3 years for it to remain valid.
Survivorship occurs where a property which is jointly owned (in joint proprietorship) passes to a surviving join owner automatically, despite what the Will bequeaths. A typical example is when a husband dies and the property automatically reverts into the surviving partner’s name. This property then becomes the sole property of the survivor and does not form part of the deceased’s husband’s Estate.
The person who has made a Will, or given a legacy.
This is the capacity to make a Will. All adults (18 years or older) are presumed to have testamentary capacity. It is only challenged in cases of dementia, insanity, under the influence of a substance or if they in some other way lacked the mental capacity to form a Will. Anyone under the age of 18 is presumed to not have the capacity to make a Will, however in some jurisdictions minors in the military or who are married have the right to make a Will and are presumed them to have testamentary capacity.
A common argument used when trying to prove that a Will is invalid. This being that the deceased acted under the influence or pressure exerted by another when writing their Will, the Will would be found to reflect the influencer’s wishes rather than the deceased’s and is invalidated.