Contesting A Will In A Contentious Corner Of Walford

Contentious probate litigation and Inheritance Act claims may not be the first story line which every soap lover hopes for but, following recent episodes of EastEnders, this may be exactly what could be in store following the reading of Archie Mitchell's will...

A Tangled Web We Weave...

An inheritance dispute concerning a wife, a bigamous wife and a fiancee of the same man may seem a little far fetched it is not at all unusual to a contentious probate solicitor. Increasing numbers of family divisions and breakups mean more and more families have cause for concern when a Will is found to leave little or nothing to those expecting inheritance. In the case of EastEnders, Archie has left a tangled web of women behind him following his suspected murder on Christmas Day 2009.

One immediate question a suspected murder raises, apart from the obvious 'who did it?' is whether or not the murderer is named as a beneficiary under Archie's Will. In the Square any number of suspects is likely, including those who received gifts under the will. The law prevents a person from benefitting from his wrongdoing and a person who kills another cannot then benefit from the deceased's estate... trying to fast track your inheritance in this way is not smiled upon by the Courts...

Putting aside the murder suspect, it transpires that Archie was a wealthy man who leaves the whole of his residuary estate (approximately 3M) to his youngest daughter Roxy. His granddaughter is to receive 100,000 and interest when she reaches the age of 21. The other hopefuls, Archie's wife, fiancee, eldest daughter and nephew leave with only a handful of personal belongings between them. But of course this is EastEnders and it turns out there is also an unknown son!

Potential Claims

Peggy
As Archie's widow, Peggy would be able to make a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (IPFDA) for reasonable financial provision as the will fails to adequately provide for her. However, their marriage was relatively short but Archie had only been with his fiancee Janine for a few weeks. In claims by spouses for reasonable provision the court will consider what is reasonable using similar principles to those used by a divorce court. The marriage was short and there were no children to look after and the court would consider what each party had brought into the marriage but nevertheless Peggy could have expected to receive substantial provision from the Will given that Archie was still her husband and their marriage, albeit turbulent, had not yet been ended by divorce.

The big question however was whether Peggy was actually married to Archie. If he had not divorced Glenda at the time of his marriage to Peggy the marriage would be void. This would have a significant impact on Peggy's claim if it demoted her to a cohabite who can also claim under the IPFDA if they have lived together as husband and Wife for 2 years before death. Unlike a spousal claim a cohabite has to demonstrate that provision is necessary for his or her maintenance - after a much less generous measure. However, whether or not the marriage was a bigamous one, Peggy is entitled to claim as a spouse because she entered into the void marriage in good faith.

Glenda
The ex wife. Ex wives do have a right to claim under the IPFDA but only if reasonable provision has not been made for them. They are not entitled to the more generous provision available to spouses. Glenda has clearly had no contact with Archie for some time and is in no way financially dependant on him. Her children (although see below) are adults and it does not seem she has been receiving any financial help from Archie over the years. Glenda, in the circumstances, would have a difficult claim.

Janine
As the fiancee Janine's position is very precarious as she only 'lived' with Archie for a matter of hours before he threw her out of the Queen Vic. There is no indication that Janine was being financially maintained by Archie and the fact he was still very much married to Peggy would have meant any eventual marriage was not immediately imminent. Janine would have no claim as a cohabite as she would not have lived as Husband and wife with the deceased for the necessary 2 year period.

Janine's only possible claim would be as a person maintained by the deceased. However she would have to show that Archie had been making a substantial contribution towards her reasonable needs and given the time scale involved this seems highly improbable.

Ronnie
The eldest daughter, Ronnie made no secret of the fact she hated her father. As an adult child she is entitled to bring a claim but as with a cohabite she would have to show that it would be reasonable for her to have some provision for her maintenance. That aside seeing her sister Roxy inherit such a large sum may prompt Ronnie to challenge the will as being unjust. It is not uncommon in cases where children have been left unequal amounts in a will for the 'offended' child to believe they have a claim to a larger share. This is not correct and there is no requirement for children to be left equal shares of an estate. Ronnie has an independent income and was not being supported by her Father prior to his death and so is unlikely to succeed in any claim.

Roxy
It is unlikely Roxy will do anything to challenge her Father's will, or assist others to challenge it either as she inherits the bulk of the fortune. Her daughter is also well provided for.

Unknown Son
We have no information about the son and do not know how old he is or where he is now. Children, illegitimate children, adopted children and children treated as a child of the family by the deceased can all bring claims under the IPFDA. However as with Ronnie the son would have to show he needed provision for his maintenance. It seems unlikely he would succeed in his claim as he has never attempted to contact Archie (we assume).

Unless of course Archie has been in secret contact with him and has been providing for him... 'doof doof doof' and cue the music!...

Concluding moments

As with any type of litigation, parties to probate and Will dispute litigation can incur significant costs if they cannot agree on an early settlement. It is important that a person making a Will remembers that although they are entitled to leave their estate to whoever they wish, they must be aware of the potential claims that could be made by family members who are excluded or only left 'token' gifts when more was expected or even promised to them. Resolving such disputes can be a lengthy process and it is unlikely we will see a resolution through the formal legal process on EastEnders. However, knowing the characters involved in the current story it is unlikely they will let matters rest as they are! Law and order in the Queen Vic is as unconventional (and unpredictable) as it comes...