Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Tue Jul 28, 2015 7:46 pm

I suspect that Russell is confusing fairness and reasonableness.

The man on the Clapham Boris Bike may be a fair test of reasonableness, but he is not a reasonable test of fairness.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6105
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Tue Jul 28, 2015 7:49 pm

Are the courts not servants of the public?


No. Courts are there to uphold the law. Even if that is unpopular.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6105
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby Russell » Tue Jul 28, 2015 7:50 pm

Further, I'm not sure if the law has changed yet or not but if a Will isn't left than the bulk of an estate would go to blood family as opposed to a civil partner. It would appear estranged relatives are better protected than civil partners.
If you can't talk about the problem, how are you ever going to even start talking about the solution?
Russell
 
Posts: 1381
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:47 pm

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:00 pm

You are incorrect. Schedule 4 of the Civil Partnerships Act 2004 provided that Civil Partners inherit in the same way as husbands or wives.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6105
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby atticus » Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:00 pm

Russell wrote:Yes, if married or a dependent its very fair.

So now go back to the Act and read section 1, which you have just given a precis of.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18634
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby Goldensyrup » Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:10 pm

I believe it is a fair decision and I pick one left of centre reason among a few. The appellant's mother's husband died in an accident three months before the appellant was born. A very large payment by the employers was made to Mrs Jackson after the accident that allowed the house mortgage to be paid off in full. Mrs Jackson's estate at her passing relied heavily on the property value. My view is that some of this asset value that accrued from the untimely death should go to the appellant as surely Mr Jackson would have wanted and had he lived he may well have taken a different view to his wife about his daughter eloping.

It really hacks me off how the charities spend so much on litigation to fight these isolated case almost as bad as their hard selling their causes in call centres.
Goldensyrup
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:52 pm

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby Russell » Tue Jul 28, 2015 9:58 pm

Golden that certainly gives a case for consideration. As does SS's dependency on welfare being lessened by the provision. However, in this case I think one of the aims of the both courts was to avoid the loss of benefits for the claimant.
If you can't talk about the problem, how are you ever going to even start talking about the solution?
Russell
 
Posts: 1381
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:47 pm

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby Russell » Tue Jul 28, 2015 9:59 pm

Smouldering Stoat wrote:You are incorrect. Schedule 4 of the Civil Partnerships Act 2004 provided that Civil Partners inherit in the same way as husbands or wives.


A friend of mine has been in this position recently and he inherited his sisters estate over her civil partner.
If you can't talk about the problem, how are you ever going to even start talking about the solution?
Russell
 
Posts: 1381
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:47 pm

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby Russell » Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:00 pm

atticus wrote:
Russell wrote:Yes, if married or a dependent its very fair.

So now go back to the Act and read section 1, which you have just given a precis of.


The act you sent didn't load I got a lot of code. But I can look it up, will try tomorrow.
If you can't talk about the problem, how are you ever going to even start talking about the solution?
Russell
 
Posts: 1381
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:47 pm

Re: A terrible ruling (Wills)?

Postby atticus » Wed Jul 29, 2015 5:44 am

The link is to the government legislation site.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18634
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

PreviousNext

Return to Wills and Probate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron