Wrangle v Brunt - a case study (on the importance of ensuring that your Will is drafted properly.)

Background:

Dean Brunt was hit by a train on December 2007, aged just 35. A few months before his death Dean, along with his siblings Dale and Venetia inherited their grandfather’s farm In Hertforshire worth approximately £6M.

Following Dean’s death, his mother Marlene, and elder brother Dale, the defendants in this case, claimed that Dean died intestate. According to the rules of intestacy, since Dean was unmarried and did not have any children, his mother Marlene was the person entitled to administer and inherit his £2M share of the farm.

Surprisingly, Marlene sought to vary her purported entitlement to Dean’s one third share of the farm and entered into a Deed of Variation. Under the Deed of Variation, Dale would inherit Dean’s 1/3rd share of the farm. This would give Dale a majority share of the farm (2/3rd) and Venetia would have a minority share (1/3rd). Venetia was not aware of her mother and brother’s devious plan. She thought that after Dean’s death, his share in the farm would be divided equally between herself and Dean.

In 2016, Dale and Marlene met with Venetia. It was in this meeting that Venetia found out that Dean purportedly died intestate and that Marlene intended to transfer her purported inheritance to Dale. Venetia vehemently disagreed with this.

Dale and Marlene tried to blackmail their way into Venetia’s share of the farm. Firstly, they evicted the claimant, Bob Wrangle, who was Dean’s uncle through marriage, married to Marlene’s sister, Valerie. Both Bob and Valerie (who died in 2010) were the main parental figures for the three siblings, with Venetia eventually moving in with them at the age of 8 or 9. The relationship between Marlene and her children is said to have “lacked maternal warmth and tenderness”. Secondly, after Dale evicted his uncle Bob from the farm, he then falsely accused Venetia of fraud.

After being evicted, Bob recalled Dean mentioning a Will before his death. This led Bob to tirelessly search for a will. He later discovered a folder in his late wife’s belongings titled “Dean’s Will”. The folder, however, was empty.

Further down the line, the family agreed to an initial mediation for the disputed assets (i.e. Dean’s share of the farm and business). However, days before the proposed mediation was meant to take place, a potential Will was discovered. Albeit a cat had knocked over a pile of correspondence that was due to be shredded during an office clear out. Amid cleaning up the mess, Dean’s Will which was drafted in 1999 was uncovered.

Marlene and Dale immediately aimed to prove this was a forgery relying on the following facts: the Will was signed by Dean’s attorney and not Dean; the incorrect spelling of Dean’s middle name at the front of the Will; and the surprising appearance of a Will that favours the claimant’s case.

In the 1999 Will, Dean left his share of the firm equally between Dale and Venetia and his share of a house on the land to his uncle Bob, as well as a tax-free gift of £20,000 for his late aunt Valerie and Bob, titled “For everything aunt Val and Uncle Bob did for us”.

The Judgement:

The Court reviewed and analysed the authenticity of the Will. It was noted that Dean had specifically asked that the Will was signed by his attorney and not him, this was because he had an active Power of Attorney during the time the Will was signed. The Validity of the Will was also examined. The Court found that the Will was not a fraudulent reproduction and that the actual signing of the Will did not invalidate it.

Experts did review the handwriting to check for any inconsistencies. It was drawn that both witnesses had no consequent gain from lying. And were therefore cleared as conclusive and accurate accounts. It was also revealed that Marlene and Dale were aware of a Will being made, as revealed by the letters found along with the Will.

The Court concluded that the Will was executed correctly and valid and therefore, demonstrated accurately Dean’s wishes following his death.

The Court decided that Marlene should be removed as an executor. She was replaced by an independent executor appointed by the Court.

Comment:

This case shows the importance of ensuring that your Will is drafted and stored properly. When drafting a Will, use a legal professional, and ensure that they register the Will with Certainty, a company that provides a national will register.

If your loved one has died and you cannot find a will, instruct a legal professional to carry out a “will search” and ensure that the correct procedure is followed.