Fraudulent calumny bears similarities to undue influence (another ground on which a Will can be challenged). Fraudulent calumny involves one person poisoning the mind of the person making the Will by making dishonest accusations about another person's character where the accused person would, otherwise, be a natural beneficiary of the testator's assets. If the fraud is shown the will is invalid.

A good example of fraudulent calumny is where a person initially intends to leave their estate to both their child A and B. However, they leave their estate to child A, on the mistaken belief that child B had been stealing from them. The belief had come from child A deliberately feeding them untruthful accusations.

Fraudulent calumny case is facing an upturn in cases, this is due to the fact that people are living longer and they can become more vulnerable to influence towards the ends of their lives.

Factors to prove Fraudulent Calumny

In order to establish fraudulent calumny you need to prove all of the following: -

1. Someone made a representation about you to the testator.
2. They did so intending that the testator would alter your inheritance, or cut you out of the Will completely.
3. They knew that that representation was false or did not care that it was false.
4. There are no other explanations for the testator to disinherit you.

These elements must be proven on the balance of probability. This can make these types of claims difficult as the fraud is often not discovered until after death and the conversations between the alleged fraudster and the testator are often held in private.

Whilst strong evidence is required, the recent case of Whittle v Whittle [2022] confirmed that, where such evidence is available, a claim of fraudulent calumny can succeed.

Whittle v Whittle

In Whittle v Whittle, the deceased died aged 92. Towards the end of his life, he became frail and vulnerable. He became dependant on his daughter and others. The daughter began to make false allegations against her brother. Amongst other allegations she had told her father that her brother was violent, committed criminal damage and stole from family members. The father eventually changed his Will leaving his assets to the daughter.

The court found that allegations about the brother were deliberate falsehoods created by the daughter to cause the father to change his Will leaving the assets to her, which he subsequently did. The Court held that it had been obtained on falsehoods and ordered the Will to be set aside and the daughter to pay costs.

Get in touch today

Whether you are faced with defending a claim or have concerns similar to those raised above, the Contentious Probate team at Gosschalks is able to get you the best possible outcome. Get in touch today with the author, Ben Marsden, today on 01482 324252 or via bem@gosschalks.co.uk.