Undue influence is often cited as a reason why disgruntled beneficiaries claim their next of kin’s Jersey Will should be overturned.
Family members, caregivers and other individuals with vested interests are all potentially able to exert undue influence. Undue influence can be subtle or overt, it can range from emotional manipulation to outright threats. It is often targeted on individuals who are vulnerable due to age, illness or dependency.
While undue influence is to be proven to the civil standard (in other words it must be more likely than not to have happened) it remains a complex task to come to proof on such a claim.
When undue influence is present, it undermines the autonomy of the testator and can lead to provisions in their Will that do not accurately reflect their wishes. In such circumstances where proof is obtained it can lead to the voiding of the Will.
A recent English case Rea v Rea has updated the principles that must be assessed in order for there to be a finding of undue influence. While the Jersey courts are not bound by English cases, it is quite possible that the principles set out in this case would be considered persuasive in Jersey.
In Rea v Rea, the court heard that the deceased, Anna, had four children: Rita, Remo, Nino and David. In the last 7 years of Anna suffered from a number of health conditions and became wheelchair-bound in the last 7 years of her life. Rita, (Anna’s daughter), became her primary carer and moved in with her until she died in 2016.
Anna made two Wills.
- The first she made in 1986. In the first Will, she left her entire estate equally between her four children.
- The second Will was made in 2015. In this second and final Will, Anna left her house to Rita with the remainder of the estate split equally between the four children. The Will was drafted by a solicitor and a capacity assessment was completed by a doctor at the time. No concerns were raised about Anna or the circumstances under which the Will was made.
Upon Anna’s death, Remo, Nino and David issued proceedings against the Will in 2017. They all claimed that Rita had unduly influenced Anna. This undue influence meant they inherited far less than their mother would have wanted them to.
Litigation ensued which went all the way to the Court of Appeal. Initially the Judge had made a finding of undue influence. The court stated they assessed all of the facts of the case, such as Anna’s vulnerability and dependency upon Rita, the drastic change in wishes from the 1986 Will to the 2015 Will and that Rita had organised for her mother to meet with a solicitor to change her Will. However, at appeal ([2024] EWCA Civ 169) the judge reversed the decision and ruled against this finding.
The English Court of Appeal found the 2025 Will valid.
By overturning the initial ruling, the English Court of Appeal emphasised that a person’s vulnerability does not automatically lead to the conclusion that a person was unable to make their own decisions. Moreover, just because somebody (i.e. Anna) may have a forceful personality, it did not mean at face value that they unduly influenced the testator.
The Court of Appeal Judge highlighted that the circumstances of the case must overwhelmingly suggest that undue influence is the most likely explanation. If an alternative explanation can be proposed, or is equally as or more plausible, then a finding of undue influence cannot be justified. The judgment established that the initial assumption should lean towards undue influence being “inherently improbable.”
All in all, Rea v Rea serves as a reminder of the inherent complexities of navigating allegations of undue influence and the importance of upholding the integrity of testamentary freedom while safeguarding against coercion and manipulation.
Before commencing any action, it is essential to conduct a proper analysis of the merits of any potential claim, in particular, whether there are any reasonable grounds for challenging the Will. Our expert Jersey Contentious Wills and Probate team at Parslows LLP are on hand to assist you to investigate the merits of any potential Will challenge claim and provide advice as to the same.
Undue influence is often cited as a reason why disgruntled beneficiaries claim their next of kin’s Jersey Will should be overturned.
Family members, caregivers and other individuals with vested interests are all potentially able to exert undue influence. Undue influence can be subtle or overt, it can range from emotional manipulation to outright threats. It is often targeted on individuals who are vulnerable due to age, illness or dependency.
While undue influence is to be proven to the civil standard (in other words it must be more likely than not to have happened) it remains a complex task to come to proof on such a claim.
When undue influence is present, it undermines the autonomy of the testator and can lead to provisions in their Will that do not accurately reflect their wishes. In such circumstances where proof is obtained it can lead to the voiding of the Will.
A recent English case Rea v Rea has updated the principles that must be assessed in order for there to be a finding of undue influence. While the Jersey courts are not bound by English cases, it is quite possible that the principles set out in this case would be considered persuasive in Jersey.
In Rea v Rea, the court heard that the deceased, Anna, had four children: Rita, Remo, Nino and David. In the last 7 years of Anna suffered from a number of health conditions and became wheelchair-bound in the last 7 years of her life. Rita, (Anna’s daughter), became her primary carer and moved in with her until she died in 2016.
Anna made two Wills.
- The first she made in 1986. In the first Will, she left her entire estate equally between her four children.
- The second Will was made in 2015. In this second and final Will, Anna left her house to Rita with the remainder of the estate split equally between the four children. The Will was drafted by a solicitor and a capacity assessment was completed by a doctor at the time. No concerns were raised about Anna or the circumstances under which the Will was made.
Upon Anna’s death, Remo, Nino and David issued proceedings against the Will in 2017. They all claimed that Rita had unduly influenced Anna. This undue influence meant they inherited far less than their mother would have wanted them to.
Litigation ensued which went all the way to the Court of Appeal. Initially the Judge had made a finding of undue influence. The court stated they assessed all of the facts of the case, such as Anna’s vulnerability and dependency upon Rita, the drastic change in wishes from the 1986 Will to the 2015 Will and that Rita had organised for her mother to meet with a solicitor to change her Will. However, at appeal ([2024] EWCA Civ 169) the judge reversed the decision and ruled against this finding.
The English Court of Appeal found the 2025 Will valid.
By overturning the initial ruling, the English Court of Appeal emphasised that a person’s vulnerability does not automatically lead to the conclusion that a person was unable to make their own decisions. Moreover, just because somebody (i.e. Anna) may have a forceful personality, it did not mean at face value that they unduly influenced the testator.
The Court of Appeal Judge highlighted that the circumstances of the case must overwhelmingly suggest that undue influence is the most likely explanation. If an alternative explanation can be proposed, or is equally as or more plausible, then a finding of undue influence cannot be justified. The judgment established that the initial assumption should lean towards undue influence being “inherently improbable.”
All in all, Rea v Rea serves as a reminder of the inherent complexities of navigating allegations of undue influence and the importance of upholding the integrity of testamentary freedom while safeguarding against coercion and manipulation.
Before commencing any action, it is essential to conduct a proper analysis of the merits of any potential claim, in particular, whether there are any reasonable grounds for challenging the Will. Our expert Jersey Contentious Wills and Probate team at Parslows LLP are on hand to assist you to investigate the merits of any potential Will challenge claim and provide advice as to the same.