Bryant v Blake

Bryant v Blake was a case before the court where the plaintiff, the defendant's mother, applied for an order to authorise the making of a will on behalf of the defendant. The defendant had been severely injured in a motor vehicle accident and had been in a comatose state for two years, with no speech for four years. The plaintiff had been caring for the defendant on a full-time and permanent basis since 1982, and had not engaged in any paid employment due to this care. The plaintiff argued that the defendant lacked testamentary capacity, and that a proposed will, which would leave the entirety of the defendant's estate to the plaintiff, would reflect the likely intentions of the defendant if they had testamentary capacity.

The legal issues before the court were whether the defendant lacked testamentary capacity, whether the proposed will reflected the likely intentions of the defendant, and whether the proposed will was reasonable in all the circumstances. The court considered the purpose of the requirement for leave in section 7(1) of the Wills Act 1936, which was to ensure that the will made was the genuine expression of the deceased's wishes. The court also considered the factors set out in section 7(3) of the Act, which required the court to be satisfied that the deceased lacked testamentary capacity, that the proposed will would accurately reflect the likely intentions of the deceased if they had testamentary capacity, and that it was reasonable in all the circumstances to make the proposed will.

The court found that the defendant did lack testamentary capacity due to the severity of their injuries and the long-term care required. The court also found that the proposed will reflected the likely intentions of the defendant if they had testamentary capacity, as the plaintiff had been the only person to care for the defendant on a full-time and permanent basis for many years. The court considered the factors set out in section 7(3) of the Act and found that it was reasonable in all the circumstances to make the proposed will. The court noted that other persons entitled to share in the defendant's estate on an intestacy or under the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1972 had had limited contact with the defendant or had consented to the will being made in the terms advanced by the plaintiff.

The court made an order authorising the making of the proposed will, which left the entirety of the defendant's estate to the plaintiff. The court found that the proposed will was reasonable in all the circumstances, given the full-time and permanent care provided by the plaintiff, and the lack of any other person who had cared for or provided emotional support for the defendant. The court also noted that the plaintiff had no funds to purchase the half share of the house to which the defendant's father would be entitled if the defendant died intestate.