THE SOCIETY OF CONTENTIOUS PROBATE AND ESTATE LAWYERS

Read More The Society known by its initials as the SCPEL, exists to promote excellent amongst lawyers in the field of Contentious Probate. It can also help members of the public with finding the best lawyers to assist with probate administration and estate claims.
Image
Estate
Law
1) Where someone has a claim against the estate of a deceased person because
2) The deceased had promised them assets which were not transferred to them.
3) The deceased had acted wrongfully towards them.
4) The Executors of the deceased are biased or incompetent or even fraudulent.
5) The estate generally is being run in a careless, biased or dishonest manner.
6) Where disputes arise as to who is entitled because of questions over relationships.
7) Claims under the Inheritance Act 1975 by members of the family or dependent's who have been left out of an inheritance or who have not been left enough, including claims by Widows or Widowers.
Image
Contentious Probate
1) Forged Wills
2)Wills made by people who are incapable of making one, perhaps because they are mentally ill.
3)Wills made under improper pressure or by coercion or bullying.
4)Wills made without any real thought, knowledge or approval.

FOR LAWYERS

Use the Online Enquiry Form to enquire about membership. You will need to demonstrate expertise in the areas of Wills, Trusts, Probate and Estates. The decision of the Society as to admission is always in our discretion and final.

There is no membership fee.

Of interest to some is that the Society hosts both lectures and convivial social occasions, including our annual dinner and other occasional dinners and drinks parties.

The Society holds an occasional tribute event to “Doctors Commons” the entity which historically was the principal court for Probate in England and Wales. Members of the Society are encouraged to dress as “Doctors” or as “Proctors”.

FOR ALL

Feel free to fill in our online questionnaire in relation to your enquiry and whether you would like a referral to one of our panel lawyers. These include both Solicitors and Barrister including Direct Public Access.

Just call us. We can answer all your questions

Image module

RECENT CASES in the reports

Testimonial by Wickham v Riley
A son who had validly discontinued his claim on his father's estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 was granted permission to issue a further claim on the estate.
Wickham v Riley
[2020] EWHC 3711 (Fam) | [2020] 11 WLUK 569
Testimonial by Knipe v British Racing Drivers' Motor Sport Charity
The court construed clauses in a will which left the residue of an estate to two named organisations which did not exist. A gift to "the British Racing Drivers Club Benevolent Fund" had to be construed as a gift to the British Racing Drivers' Club Motor Sport Charity, a benevolent fund administered by the British Racing Drivers' Club which the deceased was a member of. A gift to "the Cancer Research Fund" did not refer to a particular institution, but to the general charitable purpose of cancer research. It was therefore for the executor to apply the gift to that general charitable purpose.
Knipe v British Racing Drivers' Motor Sport Charity
[2020] EWHC 3295 (Ch) | [2020] 12 WLUK 21 | [2020] W.T.L.R. 1333|
Testimonial by Kleinhentz v Harrison
Summary: The claimant did not have a beneficial interest in either of two properties in which he had lived with the defendant. The properties had been purchased by the defendant in his sole name, and the evidence did not show a common intention on the defendant's part that the claimant should have a beneficial interest, so that no constructive trust arose in the claimant's favour. However, an agreement made between the parties in 2011 was valid and binding and required the defendant to make a payment of at least £250,000 to the claimant if he received a financial gift from his father after the date of the agreement which he was free to deal with as he wished or, alternatively, when he received an inheritance from his father.
Kleinhentz v Harrison
[2020] EWHC 3439 (Ch) [2020] 12 WLUK 240

Online consultation

*

Just call us. We can answer all your questions