Bowerman v Bowerman

Hearing dates: 29, 30 April, 1 May, 23 September 2025

Approved Judgment

This judgment was handed down remotely at 10.30am on 18 November 2025 by circulation to the parties or their representatives by e-mail and by release to the National Archives.

This is my judgment of the part of this Part 8 claim which challenges:

(1) the will dated 22 April 1999 of John Colin Bowerman (“John's 1999 will”), and

(2) the will dated 26 May 1999 of his wife, Jean Mary Bowerman (“Jean's 1999 will”). (together “the 1999 wills”)

Parties and the claim

The claimant, Alastair Bowerman, the first defendant, Ian Benjamin (Ben) Bowerman, and the Third Defendant, David Bowerman are brothers and the adult children of John and Jean Bowerman. I shall refer, without intending any disrespect, to the members of the Bowerman family by the first names used in the family.

The fourth defendant, John Andrews (“the administrator”), is a solicitor in the firm Steele Raymond LLP, to whom letters of administration with Jean's will annexed, for the use and benefit of David and Ben, were granted on 11 August 2017.

The claim was commenced on 5 August 2022 as a claim for an account. My order dated 16 March 2023 granted permission to amend to add the claim challenging the wills and provided for formal statements of case.

The grounds on which John's 1999 will is challenged are lack of testamentary capacity and lack of knowledge and approval. If that will is invalid, then John's last valid will would be his will dated 7 April 1988 (“John's 1988 will”).

The grounds on which Jean's will is challenged are lack of knowledge and approval and undue influence. If that will is invalid, then Jean's last valid will would be her will dated 7 April 1988 (“Jean's 1988 will”).

David and the administrator have both filed acknowledgements of service stating that they do not intend to defend the claim. By my order dated 2 February 2024, the administrator was expressly excused from complying with the trial directions, and from attending the trial.

Ben is therefore the only active defendant to the claim. His defence asserts that Alastair is barred by laches and acquiescence from challenging both wills. In addition, Ben asserts that John had testamentary capacity and knew and approved the contents of his will; and that Jean knew and approved the contents of her will, and that it was not procured by undue influence. By his counterclaim, he seeks an order that the court pronounce in solemn form for the 1999 wills.

Alastair has acted in person throughout, including at the trial, although his trial skeleton argument was prepared by counsel. Ben was represented by counsel throughout. His counsel up to close of evidence was Amy Berry. She was replaced by Marcus Croskell at short notice, who made closing submissions on Ben's behalf. The court has had the benefit of a transcript of the first 3 days of the trial.

Witnesses of fact Alastair's witnesses

Alastair called the following witnesses:

(1) Catherine Bowerman (Ben's wife);

(2) Caroline Davidson;

(3) Julie Bowerman (David's wife);

(4) Nicholas Frembgen;

(5) Sophie Dean;

(6) Jennifer Moffat (professional and academic name: Carpenter);

(7) Michael Carpenter; and, in addition, gave evidence himself.

None of these witnesses was present when John and Jean gave instructions for their wills, or executed them. Their evidence was therefore limited to their knowledge of John and Jean outside that context.

Catherine Bowerman (“Catherine”)

Catherine was compelled to attend by a witness summons. She filed a very late witness statement dated 24 April 2025, the admission of which Alastair did not object to. She was declared a hostile witness and cross-examined by Alastair.

Catherine was cross-examined as to whether she was involved in the drafting and execution of John's will. There was nothing about her evidence that caused me to doubt its truth on that issue.

Caroline Davidson

Ms Davidson is a friend of Alastair. Her evidence was that following his stroke, John did not have the mental capacity to fully understand and coherently make meaningful decisions. She was doing her best to help the court, but it was not clear from her evidence whether the way she described John behaving was due to cognitive impairment or his inability to express himself.

Julie Bowerman

Julie Bowerman is David's wife. Again, she did her best to help the court. I accept her evidence that questions had to be formulated carefully to get yes or no answers from John, and that sometimes he did not understand what he was being asked.

Sophie Dean

Ms Dean is Alastair's current partner. She gave her evidence straightforwardly. Her interactions with John and Jean were largely social ones. She said that when she interacted with him, she could not be sure whether he understood what she was talking about or whether he was just smiling and being polite.

Nicholas Frembgen

Mr Frembgen is a friend of Alastair. His interactions with John were also largely social. He was not able to give any specific instances showing that John's ability to understand (as opposed to his ability to speak) was impaired. His evidence therefore was of limited help to the court.

Jennifer Moffat

Ms Moffat is a niece of John and therefore a cousin of his sons. She visited the family in 1994 in the immediate aftermath of John's stroke, and after that 4–5 times a year. She described him as again only being able to say “yes”, “no” or “um”; and that he would be inconsistent and confused in his responses to simple questions. She gave her evidence in a straightforward way, and I accept it.

Ms Carpenter also gave unchallenged evidence of domineering and verbally abusive behaviour by Ben towards her mother; and her mother's view that Ben was bullying and belittling of Jean.

Michael Carpenter

Mr Carpenter is Ms Moffat's brother and a nephew of John. He is the CEO of a small business in the field of carbon technology, and lives in Norway. He confirmed John's severe difficulties in communicating and his resultant frustration. His evidence was that John would then seem to give up or lose his train of thought. Mr Carpenter also described trying to tell John about his studies in geology and quickly realising that he wasn't following what was being said, wasn't keeping track. Again, he gave his evidence in a straightforward way, and I accept it.

Alastair

Alastair is dyslexic and was under the additional pressure of representing himself at the trial. Nonetheless, his evidence was discursive and argumentative. He was reluctant to accept matters that were clear on the face of the documents. For example, his evidence was that he did not seek his parents' wills until 2005, after John's death. However, the evidence includes a letter dated 26 April 1999 from his solicitor, Pauline Twist, concerning the wills and enclosing photocopies of “all the documents”. Alistair's initial evidence was that he was not living at the address where the letter was sent (Godlingston Manor Farm), but he later accepted that he would have received the letter in 1999. I approach his evidence with caution.

David's evidence

Although neutral, David made a witness statement and was cross-examined by Alastair and Ben's counsel.

David was a straightforward witness who answered questions directly. His cross-examination did not cause me to doubt his evidence.

Ben's witnesses

Ben called the following witnesses:

(1) Andrew Robinson;

(2) Dr Michael Caruana;

(3) Louise Randall (formerly Killingback);

(4) Derek Mount;

(5) Elizabeth Brierley;

(6) Anne Le Cras; and gave evidence himself.

Andrew Robinson

Mr Robinson is an agricultural land agent and RICS chartered surveyor. He has worked with the Bowerman family since about 1981 or 1982. He gave evidence of discussions about farm matters with John both before and after his stroke. His evidence was that John was involved and able to follow those meetings even after his stroke. He did his best to help the court.

Dr Michael Caruna

Dr Caruana worked as a GP in Swanage, at the Swanage Medical Practice, from 1996 to 2012, and was the doctor for the Bowerman family throughout that time. He was a straightforward and wholly disinterested witness, who had at the relevant time a long standing knowledge of John and his medical conditions.

Louise Randall

Ms Randall was, in 1999, a trainee solicitor employed by Humphries Kirk (“HK”), the firm who drafted and arranged the execution of the wills. She attended John and Jean at their home on 22 April 1999 with draft wills, and arranged the execution of the temporary will executed by John that day. Understandably, her recollection was largely based on her attendance note at the time. However, in her oral evidence, she expanded on her witness statement in a way that made it unclear whether she was remembering or reconstructing from her usual...