Blake v Knight
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 May 1843 |
| Date | 19 May 1843 |
| Court | Ecclesiastical Court |
English Reports Citation: 163 E.R. 821
IN THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS AT DOCTORS' COMMONS
S. C. 2 Notes of Cases, 337; 7 Jur 633 Explained, Cooper v Bockett, p. 652, post. Referred to, Wright v Sanderson, 1884, 9 P D 153
blake -v. kmght. Prerogative Court, May 19th, 1843.-Positive affirmative evidence by the subscribed witnesses of the fact of signing or acknowledging the signature of a testator in their presence is not absolutely essential to the validity of a will. The Court may presume due execution by a testator upon the circumstances [S. C. 2 Notes of Cases, 337 ; 7 Jur 633 Explained, Cooper v Sorkelt, p. 652, post. Referred to, Wnyht v Sanderson, 1884, 9 P D 153 ] Edmund Blake, formerly a cletk or writer in a solicitor's office, died on the 17th day of December, 1838. The deceased had made a will, dated the [548] 6th of September, 1838, contained on one side of a sheet of paper, all in his handwriting. The attestation clause was as follows - " Signed, sealed, published, and declared by the said Edmund Blake, the testator, us, for, and to be his last will and testament, in the presence of us, who in his presence, at his request, and in the presence of each other, have subscribed our names as witnesses, the words 'dated twenty ' in the seventeenth line having been rirst obliterated " This will was signed at the end thereof by the testator, and the attestation clause" was subscribed by three witnesses-William Brewer. Charles Sellick. Greorge Biewer. Probate of this will was, on the 3rd of Januaiy, 1839, gianted to Mr James Knight, the sole executor named therein The purport of the will was to bequeath to the widow of tbe deceased an annuity of 1501. for life, and to give the whole of his property, amounting to about 70001, subject to the annuity, to the executor, Mr. Knighty an intimate friend, but no i elation of the deceased. Mrs. BLike, the widow of the deceased, died in the month of February, 1842 In the month of June, 1842, a citation issued from this Court at the instance of Mr. John Blake, a brother, and sole next of km of the deceased, and the party, who in conjunction with the widow was entitled in distribution to his personal estate and effects in case he had died intestate , it called on the executor to bring into and leave in tbe registry of the Court the probate of the said will, and to propound the same in solemn form of law, or to shew cause why letters of administration of the estate and effects of the deceased, as having died [549] intestate, should not be granted according to law. To this citation Mr. Knight appeared, and brought in the probate, and propounded the will in a common condidit. The three attesting witnesses were examined. The result of their evidence was, that the deceased did not sign the will in their presence, that he did not formally acknowledge his signature to them , that they did not see his signature on tbe face of the will at the time they subscribed, that there was no seal to the will at the time they subscribed. They admitted that the deceased spread the will open on the table before him; that he said " it was his will, written all on one side of the paper; that he had made a mistake, but icctified it at the bottom, and pointed out the place to them; that he read the woids 'This is the last will and testament of me, Edmund Blake.'" The witnesses would not undertake to swear that the name of the deceased was not signed to the will at the time they subscribed. Addams and Elphinstone for the executor. This is not an attempt to impeach a will by reason of incapacity in the testator, or of fraud or undue influence in obtaining it, but on the ground of defective execution This suit is commenced three years and a half after the death of the testator, and the witnesses are called on to speak to facts after this lapse of time. In Chambers \. The Queen's Proctor (2 Curt. 433) the witnesses to a will were examined three months [550] after the time of execution, and deposed confidently that the testator did not sign the will in their presence , the Court refused to trust to the memory of witnesses, even after so short an interval of time as had elapsed between the occurrence of the fact they were deposing to and the time of deposing The probabilities of this case are strongly in favour of a due execution , the testator 822 BLAKE V. KNIGHT 3 CURT 551. was a elerk or writer to an attorney, a situation in which he must hav e been daily iu the habit of witnessing the execution of legal instruments , indeed, the attestation clause to this will shews the knowledge and extreme accuracy of this person in these matters. The transaction was conducted with great solemnity ; the will was produced, spread open, the attention of the witnesses pointedly called to the mistake in the seventeenth line, and its correction in the attestation clause. All the witnesses admit that the testator read or spoke these words, " This is the last will and testament of me, Edmund Blake ," to what could they refer but to his signature at the end of the will, if so, there is a most formal acknowledgment-provided the Court shall be of opinion, on the circumstances, that the will was ready signed at the time Even assuming that the testator had not uttered the formal words of acknowledgment iu reference to his signature, if the Court believes the signature to have been made before the witnesses subscribed, the production of this paper, admitted to be all in the handwriting of the testator, to the witnesses, with a request to them to sign, is a sufficient compliance with the statute. Haggard and Harding contra. [551] There is no affirmative evidence whatever of the act of signing or acknowledging a signature, which distinguishes this case from Chambers v. The Queen'* Ptoftw , in that case one of the three attesting witnesses deposed confidently to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Larina Jacobs-Lamothe v Janet Hendricks, Rona Hendricks-Brown and Bernice Hendricks-Gomes
...paragraphs 63 – 64; Witness Statement of Mishka Jacobs pages 1 – 3 of Trial Bundle B 3 Seventeenth Edition at page 146 4 Blake v Knight (1843) 3 Curt. 547 5 (1852) 2 Rob 426 at page 432 6 Blackman v Man [2008] WTLR 389 7 ( (1869), LR 1 P & D 655, 38 LJ P & M 81, 20 LT 497, sub nom Cleare v ......
-
Cooper against Bockett
...under which the Will was produced and witnessed, the deceased had signed the Will before their subscription. Slake v. Knight (3 Curt. 547), Moore v. King (3 Curt. 243), Gove v. Gawen (3 Curt. 151), Chambers v. The Queen's Proctor (2 Curt. 415), were referred to. At the conclusion of the arg......
-
Kevil v Lynch
...v. Scriven 1 Roberts. 772; 1 N. C. 122. Croft v. CroftENR 4 Sw. & Tr. 10; 34 L. J. n. s. Pr. M. & Ad. 44; 13 W. R. 526. Blake v. KnightENR 3 Curt. 547; 2 N. C. 337. Lloyd v. RobertsENR 12 Moo. P. C. 158. Gwillim v. GwillimENR 3 Sw. & Tr. 200; 29 L. J. n. s. Pr. M. & Ad. 31. Cooper v. Bocket......
-
Burgoyne v Showler
...Gave v. Gawen (3 Curt. 151); Cooper v. Boffatt (ib. 64S); Pentmnt v. Kingscote (ib. 642), Newton v Claike (2 Curt. 320); Blake v. Knight (3 Curt. 547); In the Goods of Colman (3 Curt 118), Todd v IFvnehehea (2 Cair. & P. 488). Addama and Jenner for the next of kin If the 9th section of the ......
-
Preliminary Sections
...801. 376 Benmax v. Austin Motor Co. Ltd., (1955) 1 All E.R. 326, (1955) A.C. 370; 99 Sol. Jo. 129; 72 R.P.C. 39. 158 Blake v. Knight (1843) 163 E.R. 821; 3 curt 547 1 LT. (05) 208. 92 Blunt v. Blunt (1943) 2 All E.R. 76; (1943) A.C. 517; 112 L.J.P. 58; 169 L.T. 33; 59 T.L.R. 315; 87 Sol. Jo......
-
ESTATE OF RANDLE: NELSON & ANOR. V. AKOFIRANMI
...should be presumed. 10 CASES RFFERRED TO IN JUDGMENT: 1. Young v. Smi:h & Richards 163 E.R. 443 3 Curt 371 2. Blake v. Knight (1843) 163 E.R. 821; 3 curt 547 1 L.T. (05) 208. 3. Cooper v. Bockett (1846) 163 E.R. 855; 4 Moo PCC 419; 10 Jur 931. I5 4. Wright v. Sanderson (1884) P & D 149 33 L......