High Court battle over partially torn-up will

A partially destroyed will has led a family into a High Court battle over an £800,000 estate.

The case was sparked when 92-year-old Carry Keats partially ripped up her will while in hospital during the last weeks of her life in 2022.

The Wills Act, 1837 states that anyone can invalidate their will by “burning, tearing, or otherwise destroying” the document. However, they must also show they have clear intent to revoke the will and retain “testamentary capacity” – a clear ability to decide who they want to inherit their estate.

If Ms Keats legally destroyed her will and died intestate, her younger sister Josephine Oakley will inherit. However, if the will stands, it will be the deceased’s five cousins who benefit.

The cousins’ case hinges partly on Ms Keats only tearing three-quarters of the way through the document, with the job finished off by her solicitor, Hafwen Webb.

Ms Oakley told the court that she had visited her sister regularly in her final years and the pair had grown closer. She added that Ms Keats had meanwhile been angered by her cousins’ suggestion that she should be placed in a care home.

Solicitor Ms Webb also testified that her long-standing client had changed her mind about who she wanted to inherit.

Describing the key visit to hospital, Ms Webb said: “Her character hadn’t changed. She was still the same old Carry. She knew who I was and why I was there. I told her repeatedly that if she died intestate Jo would inherit. She said their father would be pleased. I told her she could tear up the will to revoke it. She wasn’t happy that the will was in place. She gave me instructions and from that I took it that she had capacity.”

She added that Ms Keats had previously visited her lawyers in November 2021, saying she intended to remove the cousins from the will.

“I felt confident and comfortable after she ripped up the will that she was at peace. She looked at peace and I felt that was what she wanted, especially with what she had told me in November the year before.”

A ruling will be given on the case in due course.