Divorce & The Inheritance Act

The Inheritance Act 1975 gives certain people the legal right to make a claim against a person’s estate for ‘reasonable financial provision’. However, a recent case, Sismey v Salandron, is the first-ever where this type of claim has reached trial. And it’s widely believed that the decision made in this case will affect estates involving divorce settlements, financial provision and leaving a property in a Will.

So, we thought it would be helpful to explain why this case is so important.

The Case – Sismey v Salandron

The claim was brought to court by Thomas Sismey, son of the deceased. The deceased divorced his third wife (Thomas’s mother) in 2017, having agreed in the divorce settlement that he would leave his property to their son Thomas. Marissa Salandron, who was the deceased’ girlfriend at the time, also signed the settlement to show she was aware of its contents. The Family Court approved the agreement. Thomas was to have the house.

Unfortunately, two years later, Thomas’ father was diagnosed with terminal cancer. To ensure Marissa would benefit from the widow’s benefit of his pension, they then married. Unfortunately, his fourth marriage revoked his previous Will, leaving Marissa as the sole beneficiary. As a result, Thomas would not inherit and brought a claim against his father’s estate for the house.

Thomas argued that the 2017 divorce agreement should stand. On the other hand, Marissa maintained that, as a widow, under Section 11 of the Inheritance Act, she was entitled to ‘reasonable financial provision’, even though she had signed the court-approved divorce settlement, leaving James the house.

Court Decision

The judge upheld James’ claim and rejected Marissa’s. Taking the terms of the divorce settlement into account, the court thought the terms of the original agreement were fair. Furthermore, James’ father had kept a sizeable pension as part of the settlement, so James should inherit the property as intended.

Implications

Given that 42% of married couples are expected to divorce, the implications of this case are being taken seriously.

The judgment raises serious issues around agreeing (in a divorce settlement) that property should be left in a Will. However, it’s also clear that family court-approved divorce settlements may be set aside if they do not adequately account for reasonable financial provision under Section 11 of the Inheritance Act.

It’s also possible, if Marissa had been married for longer, she might have been able to make a more credible claim on the right of occupation. If she had succeeded, James would have been deprived of the main benefit of the original divorce order without the ability to re-negotiate his father’s death.

Our Advice

The death of a loved one can be devastating and is made harder if there are disputes or challenges over their estate. Our lawyers are highly experienced in advising clients about making Wills and creating Trusts. This case highlights the importance of consulting a lawyer and being advised on all the circumstances surrounding your Will.

If you or your family are concerned about this or need advice about planning for the future, please contact us to see how we can help.

Please note that all views, comments or opinions expressed are for information only and do not constitute and should not be interpreted as being comprehensive or as giving legal advice. No one should seek to rely or act upon, or refrain from acting upon, the views, comments or opinions expressed herein without first obtaining specialist, professional or independent advice. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, Curtis Parkinson cannot be held liable for any errors, omissions or inaccuracies.

Partnerships & Accreditations