Re: BQL

The applicant, an ex-wife of BQL, sought leave to apply for a statutory will to be made on behalf of her former husband, who had lost testamentary capacity following a stroke. The parties had agreed on the terms of the proposed will. The court was tasked with determining whether leave should be granted to the applicant under section 22 of the Succession Act 1981 to apply for an order to authorise a will to be made on BQL's behalf and whether the agreed draft will was one that BQL would probably have made.

The court considered the evidence of BQL’s testamentary capacity, his statements that the applicant would be provided for in his will, and the circumstances in which the 2005 will was made. The applicant provided evidence that BQL had lost testamentary capacity and that no new will had been found. The court also examined the proposed will, noting that it was consistent with the wishes expressed by BQL before he lost testamentary capacity. The court found that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for the relief sought.

In its decision, the court held that the applicant had established that BQL had lost testamentary capacity and that no valid will had been found. The court found that the draft will was consistent with what BQL had expressed he would want in his will and that it was in his best interests for the will to be made. The court granted leave to the applicant to apply for an order to authorise a will to be made on behalf of BQL and made the will in the terms of the draft will that was agreed upon by the parties. The court also ordered that the costs of the proceedings be paid from BQL's estate and that any publication of the court's reasons be anonymised to protect the parties' privacy.