This article looks at three recent and important decisions under the Inheritance etc. Act 1975; namely, Ilott v Mitson, Iqbal v Ahmed (both Court of Appeal 2011) and Lilleyman v Lilleyman (Briggs J, Chancery Division, 2012).
It analyses the three decisions from the perspective of what can be learnt from them and in particular what is and is not relevant when advising on the merits of 1975 Act claims, and in appeals in that jurisdiction, and whether for claimant or defendant.
The article analyses the proper way to look at the 1975 Act and the cases on it and the need to avoid advising on a false basis, usually derived from what is not in that Act or the cases. It also focuses on the most important aspect of costs, costs protection and Part 36 offers. The unfortunate costs outcome for the Claimant in Llleyman is demonstrated from the figures in that case.
The articles is written by the principal author of "Inheritance Act Claims, Law Practice and Procedure" (Jordans) who as a practising barrister in this field, can shed real light on what does and does not matter in these claims when in Court.