This is part of a series of case round-ups provided by our Wills & Probate team. Click or tap here to access the whole series.

Background

Mr Christopher Ramus died on 23rd June 2020. Mr Ramus and Mrs Elizabeth Ramus had been married for 48 years, although Mrs Ramus decided to separate in 2019.They had two children, namely, Mrs Holt and Alister Ramus. Mr Ramus’ Will appointed his daughter and professional Mr Armitage and Mr Wardle as Trustees. Mr Ramus’ Will directed that his residuary estate be held on life interest trust for the benefit of Mrs Ramus.

The trustees had the power to: apply capital from the trust for her benefit and, terminate the life interest. Subject to the life interest, the trust fund was held on discretionary trust for the beneficiaries Mrs Rasmus and her children. The trustees could exclude Mrs Rasmus from benefiting from the discretionary trust.

Mrs Ramus described her relationship with her daughter as strained. Therefore, she had concerned that Elizabeth may restrict the capital and or income Mrs Ramus would receive from the trust to maintain her current lifestyle. She applied to the court under the Inheritance Provisions for Family and Dependants Act 1975 believing that the Will did not provide her with adequate financial provisions. She sought for the court to order that the trust to be amended to remove the trustee’s ability to exclude her as a beneficiary, to remove and replace Elizabeth as a trustee and to receive a minimum sum from the trust.

The Courts Ruling

The Claim was dismissed. The court found that the claim was not founded on a need for capital or income, but rather based on the relationship between the applicant and the trustee. The Court found that Mrs Ramus had not demonstrated that she had not received adequate provision from the estate. The Court applied the Duxbury calculations and found that Mrs Ramus faired better than she would have in divorce proceedings.

Take Away from The Case

It is important to consider the root cause of the applicant’s claim. The unusual approach for claiming for financial provision under the 1975 Act ultimately was not founded on the need for financial provision. Another interesting point to note is the Judge applying the Duxbury calculations. This is commonly used in divorce cases but they are increasingly being used in financial provision claims, although the Judges are not obliged to take this approach.

Get in touch today

If you would like to find out more about any of the topics covered in our Wills and Estate Dispute case round-ups, get in touch with a member of our team today: 01482 324252.