Bitter Probate Battle Reaches Supreme Court

A lengthy, 12-year-old legal battle between three animal charities and an estranged daughter has today reached the Supreme Court.

On her death in 2004, Melita Jackson left her entire £486,000 estate to the RSPCA, RSPB, and the Blue Cross. Jackson's estranged daughter, Heather Ilott, claimed she was entitled to financial provision from her mother's estate, and in 2007 was awarded £50,000 of her mother's fortune.

In 2015, Ilott challenged the initial ruling and the amount was trebled to £163,000. The charities are now challenging this second award.

The case represents the first time the Supreme Court has been asked to consider the provisions of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, which states that a parent must make "reasonable financial provision" for a child.

James Aspden, who is representing the three animal charities, said that the charities were appealing in order to obtain "essential clarity" regarding the scope of the courts to interfere with a person's testamentary wishes. He continued;

"Mrs Jackson made clear in her Will that her entire £500,000 estate should be left to the charities to help animals and wild birds in need, and she specified that none should go to her daughter from whom she had been estranged for 26 years and who had been financially independent from her for more than two decades."

If you need assistance with a contentious probate, speak to our team today for specialist advice. Call us in complete confidence on 01206 299282.

Gillbanks Law

Dispute Solicitors