Willans has won a significant High Court case that clarifies the law on testamentary capacity and mental illness, providing important guidance for families and legal practitioners.
The case, which was led by Willans’ partner, Claire Cox, involved extensive medical evidence, 13 witness testimonies, and expert psychiatric opinion.
In Ginger v Mickleburgh, the High Court considered a long‑running family dispute involving the will of Michael Gwilliam of the Forest of Dean, who died in February 2022.
Willans acted for Michael’s four daughters, who challenged their father’s 2014 will on the basis that he lacked capacity at that time. This was due to his late onset schizophrenia, which was causing him to suffer from delusions, including his belief that his daughters were conspiring against him. It was further alleged that the will was brought about by the fraudulent calumny of the defendants (two of whom were Michael’s sister and ex partner).
Michael had previously refused to prepare a will and specifically told his daughters that he wanted to be intestate, as his estate would pass to them. In 2014 Michael began suffering from paranoid thoughts that people were tapping on his windows and shining lights into his property. He made complaints to the police regarding what he perceived to be harassment and stayed up all night patrolling his farm from what he considered to be potential intruders.
In spring 2014, Michael was sectioned under the Mental Health Act, and by November 2014 he had prepared a will, leaving his daughters only a 25% share of his estate, with the remainder left to his sister, ex-girlfriend and nephews (the defendants).
Michael’s daughters argued that the will was invalid as he was suffering from delusions at that time. However, the defendants defended the claim on the basis that Michael was not delusional but was in fact being harassed by his former Forest of Dean associates. They claimed that he did have capacity to prepare a will.
The outcome
In the final judgment, the judge declared that the disputed will was invalid on the grounds that the deceased lacked testamentary capacity at the time it was made. It was found that Michael was suffering from insane delusions or a disorder of the mind arising from schizophrenia, which affected his will by preventing him from properly considering his daughters’ claims, who he had previously been close to.
Michael’s delusions led him to wrongly believe that his four daughters were stealing from him and tried to have him sectioned for their own financial gain – none of which the Court found to be true. As a result, it was ruled that the will was invalid and Michael died intestate, entitling his daughters to inherit his estate.
The Court did not accept the claim of fraudulent calumny, an allegation that the defendants poisoned Michael’s mind against his daughters, with statements they knew to be false (or were reckless as to their truth), deliberately inducing him to make a will.
While the Court accepted that many of the factual allegations made were proven, and the defendants intended to induce Michael to make a will that was less favourable to his daughters, HHJ Blohm QC found that both defendants believed the daughters were trying to have Michael sectioned for their own financial gain – therefore this ground failed.
What does this mean?
The case is notable as the will was prepared by an experienced paralegal who gave evidence that she considered that Michael did have capacity, and stated that Michael’s mental health nurse, who was present at the time that the will was made, had indicated as such. The nurse denied this in evidence, and the Court accepted that he had not performed an assessment of capacity.
Giving judgment, it was recognised that the Court will give the opinion of an experienced solicitor “considerable weight” but “that is not to ignore other evidence”. It was recognised that a report from a medical professional on capacity should have been obtained (the Golden Rule), particularly given that the paralegal was on notice of the sectioning, “adopting the Golden Rule would have been prudent”. Consequently, the Judge gave “little weight” to the evidence of the will writer.
Willans LLP acted for the four daughters of the deceased throughout the proceedings, guiding them through what was a complex and emotionally charged dispute, which had been ongoing for over four years. The firm’s involvement reflects its recognised expertise in inheritance disputes. Speaking after the judgment, Claire Cox said:
“This was a harrowing case for our clients, but we are pleased that the Court recognised the impact of Michael’s serious mental illness on testamentary decision‑making. The judgment reinforces the importance of the good practice of solicitors obtaining contemporaneous capacity reports where there are any questions as to testamentary capacity.”
Following the outcome, Michael’s daughter, Caroline Gwilliam said: “Claire Cox provided exceptional skill, clear guidance and steadfast support. She handled difficult opposing solicitors with authority and professionalism, and her dedication to our case was invaluable. Claire and the supporting team at Willans got us justice for our father, finally”.
The decision has wider importance for solicitors, families and professionals involved in supporting older or vulnerable individuals, reinforcing the importance of robust safeguards when preparing wills.
