Reviewed by Sidney Ross TEP

This edition of Inheritance Act Claims: A Practical Guide is structured in the same way as the preceding edition but includes three new sections. These are concerned, respectively, with persons falling within the amended s.1(1)(d) of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the Act), applications under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and the general anti‑avoidance rule. As before, it will be welcomed by all those needing a concise guide to an area of the law that displays difficulties that practitioners may not have encountered if their mainstream experience is in general litigation, family law or probate matters and they find themselves handling a family provision claim. Chief among these difficulties is the unpredictability of the outcome, both as to the value judgment and, if it arises, the assessment of quantum. That is illustrated with great clarity by the passage from the judgment of Lady Justice Black (as she then was) in Ilott v Mitson cited in s.4.4 of the book.[1]

As before, the overview provides a brief history of the development of the jurisdiction, posing six questions for the practitioner, addressed in the 11 chapters that follow. Questions 1 and 2, covered by chapters 2 and 3, relate to eligibility. Questions 3 and 4, dealt with in chapters 4–6, are concerned with outcome. Question 5 emphasises the importance of the size and nature of the net estate. Chapter 7 deals with the rarely resorted to anti‑avoidance provisions and the problems associated with establishing the requisite intention. Chapter 8 provides a well‑organised survey of the procedure and includes the essential reminder to consider, at the outset, all claims for alternative remedies. Chapter 9 considers the definition of the net estate generally and the court’s powers under ss.8 and 9 to treat property of which the deceased could not have disposed by will as part of the net estate. That chapter also discusses orders the court can make on variation of ante‑ and post‑nuptial settlements under s.2(1)(f) of the Act and is particularly timely in view of the increasing number of similar cases, and the diversity of views about their treatment, in the corresponding area of the matrimonial jurisdiction.

The relevant case law has been updated to March 2022. Among important recent cases are Proles v Kohli;[2] Cowan v Foreman;[3] Re Ubbi and Re R (deceased);[4] and Re Clarke deceased.[5] Section 8.4.2 of the book addresses an important development of the case law, that is, the way in which the courts have recently dealt with late claims. As well as Cowan, the strong case on the merits proved decisive in Begum v Ahmed,[6] Kaur v Bolina (in which the estate had already been distributed)[7] and Bhusate v Patel,[8] when permission was granted and upheld on appeal, although the claim was brought 25 years out of time.