A useful reminder that the decision of the court is not necessarily the objective truth: Adepoju v Akinola [2016] EWHC 3160 (Ch)

At its heart Adepoju v Akinola [2016] EWHC 3160 (Ch) was a simple probate case. However the judgment also provides a useful reminder to litigants as to how the court decides a case. The case was brought by the daughter of Mrs Adepoju (deceased) who had died intestate to obtain Letters of Administration. Mr Akinola who claimed to be Mrs Adepoju’s widower defended the claim asserting he was the most appropriate person to administer her estate.

Background 

The deceased died intestate in July 2015. Ms Adepoju applied for Letters of Administration in October 2015. Mr Akinola entered a caveat against the estate and a warning was then entered by Ms Adepoju in January 2016. Mr Akinola entered an appearance to the warning on 26 January 2016 resulting in Ms Adepoju commencing her probate claim in February 2016. The parties were essentially disputing their status as beneficiaries in relation to the estate. Both parties feared that whoever administered the estate would favour his or herself and so ultimately the decision as to who should administer the estate was crucial.

The claim 

Ms Adepoju sought in addition to...

Read the full article here.