Re Watson (Deceased)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 November 1998 |
| Date | 27 November 1998 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
Chancery Division
Before Mr Justice Neuberger
Matrimonial law - man and woman living together - whether as husband and wife
When considering whether a person was living as the wife of the deceased for the purposes of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, the court should ask itself whether, in the opinion of the reasonable person, it could be said that the two people were living together as husband and wife. However, when considering that question, the it should not ignore the multifarious nature of marital relations.
Mr Justice Neuberger so held in the Chancery Division when granting an application by Eileen Griffiths for reasonable financial provision from the estate of John Watson. The application was opposed by the Crown to whom the whole estate would otherwise have passed as bona vacantia.
Section 1 of the 1975 Act provides:
"(1) Where … a person dies domiciled in England and Wales and is survived by any of the following persons … that person may apply to the court … on the ground that the disposition of the deceased's estate effected by his will or the law relating to intestacy … is not such as to make reasonable financial provision for the applicant."
Subsection (1A), as inserted by section 2(3) of the Law Reform (Succession) Act 1995, provides:
"This subsection applies to a person if … during the whole of the period of two years ending immediately before the date when the deceased died, the person was living - (a) in the same household as the deceased, and (b) as the husband or wife of the deceased."
Mr Andrew Marsden for the plaintiff; Mr Timothy Evans for the defendant.
MR JUSTICE NEUBERGER said that Miss Griffiths, who was born in 1931, had formed an attachment with Mr Watson in 1964. She moved into Mr Watson's house in 1985 where they both lived until his death.
The basis of the financial arrangement between them was that Mr Watson continued working, thereby providing most of the income for the running of the household and Miss Griffiths was responsible for the housekeeping, washing, shopping, cooking and gardening. It was also agreed that she would contribute towards half the cost of outgoings such as gas, electricity and telephone.
Although in its earliest years their relationship included sexual intimacy, during the period that Miss Griffiths and Mr Watson lived together they did not share a bedroom or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Baker v Baker
-
Mr Andrew Banfield v Mr John James McNeil Campbell
...around 2011 onwards and that for sometime prior to that the Deceased and Mr Banfield had slept in separate bedrooms. 17 In Re Watson [1999] 1 FLR 878, at 883, it was said by Neuberger J, as he then was, that the test is:- “Whether, in the opinion of a reasonable person with normal perceptio......
-
Ilott v Mitson (1st Respondent) Michael Peter Lane (personal representatives of Melita Jackson Deceased) (2nd Respondent) The Blue Cross Animal Welfare Charity (3rd Respondent) Royal Society for The Protection of Birds (4th Respondent) Royal Society for The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (5th Respondent)
...the fact that she had been living in straitened financial circumstances. She submits that Neuberger J, as he then was, in Re Watson [1999] 1 FLR 878 at 890 rightly rejected the idea that a claimant has no need for the purposes of the 1975 Act if she has been living within her means: …just b......
-
Between: Louise Lindop v Emma Jane Agus and Others
...an entirely adequate test and one which is consistent with the authorities.” 9 Guidance has also been given by Neuberger J in Re Watson [1999] 1 FLR 878: the court should ask itself whether, in the opinion of a reasonable person with normal perceptions, it could be said that the two people......
-
Table of Cases
...1 All ER 835, CA 60 Walters v Olins [2008] EWCA Civ 782, [2009] Ch 212, [2009] 2 WLR 1, [2008] All ER (D) 58 (Jul) 164, 165 Watson, Re [1999] 1 FLR 878, [1999] 3 FCR 595, [1999] Fam Law 211, ChD 185 Watson v Huber [2005] All ER (D) 156 (Mar), ChD 82 Wayland’s Estate, Re [1951] 2 All ER 1041......
-
Claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
...maintained as a single unit, it will be possible for a claim to be made under this head (see Gully v Dix [2004] EWCA Civ 139, Re Watson [1999] 1 FLR 878 and Lindop v Agus, Bass and Hedley [2009] EWHC 14 (Ch)). Whether the claim can be made, and if made whether it will succeed, will depend u......
-
Enduring Love? Attitudes to Family and Inheritance Law in England and Wales
...(Succession) Act 1995 s. 2. 25 For consideration of what constitutes cohabitation for the requisite period, see ReWatson (Deceased) 1999] 1 FLR 878; Kotke v. Saffarini [2005] EWCA Civ 221[2005] 2 FLR 517 (claim under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976) and Nutting v.Southern Housing Group Ltd [20......