Millward v Shenton

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeTHE MASTER OF THE ROLLS,LORD JUSTICE MEGAW,LORD JUSTICE STAMP
Judgment Date23 March 1972
Judgment citation (vLex)[1972] EWCA Civ J0323-2
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
Date23 March 1972

[1972] EWCA Civ J0323-2

In The Supreme Court of Judicature

Court of Appeal

Appeal of Mr. Clifford John Millward, Applicant.

Before

The Master of the Rolls (Lord Deming)

Lord Justice Megaw and

Lord Justice Stamp

In the Matter of the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1938

and

In the Matter of the Estate of Elsie May Millward deceased

Between
Clifford John Millward
Applicant Appellant
and
John Shenton (sued as executor of Elsie May Millward deceased)
First Respondent
and
The British Empire Cancer Campaign for Research
Second Respondent

r. CONWAY CLIFFORD (instructed by Messrs. Booth and Blaokwell, London agents for Messrs. Harold Roberts and Lea of Birmingham) appeared on behalf of the Appellant Appllcant.

r. T. LLOYD (instructed by Messrs. Crossman, Block and Keith) appeared on behalf of both Respondents.

THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS
1

On 18th JULY 1970, an old lady, Mrs. Millward, died at the age of 82. She left £3,144. She had seven children – three daughters and four sons. One daughter had died a year or two previously of cancer. The other children were al1 in good health. We are here concerned with a son, Clifford John Millward, who was aged 52 when his mothar died. He is married and has a married son. But ever since 1966, for the last five years, he has been an invalid for whom there is no hope. He has dystrophia syotonica, which means that he can do hardly anything for himself. He cannot even communicate his thoughts except to those close to him. His wife is also severely handicapped with osteoarthritis.

2

Old Mrs. Millward, about two months before her death, made a will, She made it on 29th April 1970. She herself had a bad heart and was not expected to live very long. By her will she left everything to the British Empire Cancer Campaign for research. Now an application is made by the son Clifford under the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act, 1938, as amended by later Acts and now set out in its amended form in the Schedule to the Family Provision Act 1966, The son Clifford is entitled to apply as a dependant under that Act, because he comes within section 1(l)(d) as "a son who is, by reason of some mental or physical disability, incapable of maintaining himself".

3

Section l(1) of the Act provides that "if the Court….is of opinion that the disposition of the deceaaed's estate effected by his will….is not such as to make reasonable provision for the maintenance of that dependent, the Court may order that such reasonable provision as the Court thinks fit" shall be made for the maintenance of that dependent.

4

Section l(7) provides that the Court shall have regard to the deceased's reasons, as far as asoertainable.

5

The Court must, therefore, enquire why the old lady gave all her estate to the Cancer Campaign, and nothing to her children, not even toher invalid son Clifford. On this matter there is a very helpful statement by the solicitor who took fnefruaticm for the will. It appears quite plain that when Mrs. Millward made her will she was clear in her mind. She was well aware of what she was doing and able to engage in lively oonversation. She was sitting in a wheelchair when he took the instructions. She told the solicitor that everything was to be given for cancer research. The solicitor very properly asked her about the provisions for her children. The statement says: She stated that no other arrangement should be made for her children since they were all self-supporting so far as she was aware, and moreover that they had begun to fight already over the monies which should become peyable after her death and she had no wish to benefit any of them and particularly not to benefit any of them at any greater extent than any one or more of the others, as she thought that her complete estate might be wasted in the costs of an action which might be mischieviously brought." The solicitor added: "She did not wish to leave a legacy of bitterness and argument and preferred to leave everything that she had for the promotion of cancer research".

6

If wad in so far as Mrs. Millward thought her children were all self-supporting, she was mistaken. Clifford Millward, the son who was incapacitated, was not self-supporting. He was dependent altogether on State assistance. He had SOCIAL security benefits of £8.10 a week, supplementary benefits of £4.05 a week, and clothes and personal chattels worth about £70. The was no personal reason for cutting him out of the will. The Judge found that the relationship between this son and his mother had been a normal affectionate ones he had been a frequent visitor to her when he was fit and had done work for her such as painting and decorating the house. He was self-supporting...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Negus v Bahouse and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 23 October 2007
    ...If I may say so with respect, “breadline” there would be more accurately described as “subsistence level.” Then there was Millward v. Shenton [1972] 1 W.L.R. 711 in this court. I think I need only refer to one of the overseas reports, In re Duranceau [1952] 3 D.L.R. 714, 720, where, in some......
  • Moody v Stevenson
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 12 July 1991
    ...one Master of the Rolls at the beginning and pronounced disfavour from another at the end (compare re Howell [1953] 1 W.L.R. 1035 with Millward v. Shenton [1972] 1 W.L.R. 711). 21 We have not found it necessary to go into that controversy ourselves, still less to reach any conclusion on it,......
  • Hanbury v Hanbury
    • United Kingdom
    • Family Division
    • Invalid date
    ...Re, Harlow v National Westminster Bank plc[1995] 1 FCR 257, [1994] Ch 286, [1994] 3 All ER 27, [1994] 3 WLR 67, CA. Millward v Shenton [1972] 2 All ER 1025, [1972] 1 WLR 711, CA. Watkins, Re, Hayward v Chatterton [1949] 1 All ER Wood, Re (2 April 1982, unreported), Ch D. ApplicationThe appl......
  • Re Coventry, decd.; Coventry v Coventry
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 18 July 1979
    ...so with respect, "bread line" there would be more accurately described as "subsistence level". 19 Then there was a case in this court, Millward v. Shenton, (1972) 1 Weekly Law Reports, 711. 20 I think I need only refer to one of the overseas reports, the case of Re Duranceau, which is repo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT