How To Contest A Will?

Broadly speaking, a will can be challenged in 4 distinct ways:

1. Lack of testamentary capacity:

    This means that the testator (the will maker) was not mentally sound or competent at the time of signing the will, due to factors such as dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, or some other mental impairment. To put it another way, the testator was incapable of forming a judgment about how to divide their estate, and amongst whom.

    2. Unlawful pressure / manipulation / undue influence:

    This occurs when the testator was pressured, manipulated or coerced into making decisions against their wishes. This could involve manipulation, threats, or even physical abuse by which the testator’s will is overcome and supplanted with the will of the person applying the pressure.

    3. Failure to follow legal formalities:

    The will must be drafted and executed in accordance with the specific legal formalities. Failure to comply with these requirements, such as proper witnessing, signing the will in the correct location, improper attestation clauses, could invalidate the will. Also grouped together under this category are cases of fraud or forgery. This involves the intentional alteration or misrepresentation of the contents of the will. This could include a third party being added or removed as a beneficiary or changing the distribution of assets or even forging the testator’s signature.

    4. Failure to provide adequate provision (Family Provision Claim):

    In some jurisdictions, such as Queensland, a spouse or child or a dependant has the right to expect to receive maintenance by way of financial support from the deceased. If they are not explicitly provided for, or adequately provided for, in the will then they have the right to make a claim. These are known as family provision claims. Essentially what the claim is about is that adequate provision for the proper maintenance and support of the spouse, child or dependant was not made and the Court is asked to interfere and exercise its own judgment as to the amount that is reasonable in all the circumstances.

    Challenging the will is a complex legal process that does require the assistance from an experienced estate lawyer.

    It is important to remember that each case is unique and depends on the specific circumstances. The experienced Madsen Law team can provide you with the guidance and support you need to navigate this process and achieve a favourable outcome. Contact us today for an initial consultation to discuss your case and how we can help you.

    Latest Posts

    Case Conferencing
    Family Law

    Case Conferencing Insights for Successful Advocacy

    Learn how details, context, and presentation strategy can complement legal arguments for impactful case conferencing outcomes.

    Read More →
    Family Law

    THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER IS TERRIBLE – SO HOW DO I GET THEM REPLACED?

    In the recent case of Stanhope v Stanhope (2023), the Family Court of Western Australia faced a critical decision regarding the father’s plea for the removal of the Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL). Allegations included the ICL’s perceived lack of impartiality, professionalism, and capability to serve the child’s best interests. The court, however, emphasized the ICL’s unique role, outlining that removal should only occur for substantial reasons, such as deliberate misinformation, unethical behavior, bias, incompetence, or a conflict of interest.

    Read More →
    Property Law

    Navigating the Property Law Act 2023: A Guide to Key Changes and Common Questions

    The Property Law Act 2023 (“PLA 2023”) introduced significant changes to Queensland’s property laws, affecting both buyers and sellers.

    Read More →
    Case Conferencing
    Family Law

    Case Conferencing Insights for Successful Advocacy

    Learn how details, context, and presentation strategy can complement legal arguments for impactful case conferencing outcomes.

    Read More →
    Family Law

    THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER IS TERRIBLE – SO HOW DO I GET THEM REPLACED?

    In the recent case of Stanhope v Stanhope (2023), the Family Court of Western Australia faced a critical decision regarding the father’s plea for the removal of the Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL). Allegations included the ICL’s perceived lack of impartiality, professionalism, and capability to serve the child’s best interests. The court, however, emphasized the ICL’s unique role, outlining that removal should only occur for substantial reasons, such as deliberate misinformation, unethical behavior, bias, incompetence, or a conflict of interest.

    Read More →