A Line of Sight? The Perils of an Invalid Will

11 November, 2025 5 minutes reading time

Lessons from Coady v Coady

Writing a Will is one of the most important things you’ll ever do. It allows you to decide who inherits your property, making sure your final wishes are followed. But simply signing a piece of paper isn’t enough. A Will must strictly follow legal rules. These rules, known as the formalities of execution, are described in Section 9 of the Wills Act 1837.

A recent High Court case, Peter Coady v Gerard Coady, provides a strong and timely reminder. It demonstrates how carefully courts enforce these rules—and the financial and emotional chaos that can occur when they are overlooked.

The Cornerstone of a Valid Will

In England and Wales, a Will must satisfy four statutory requirements to be valid:

1. In Writing and Signed: The testator (the person making the Will) must sign it, or instruct someone else to sign it for them in their presence.

2. Intention: The testator must sign with the intention of making the Will effective.

3. Presence of Witnesses: The testator must sign or acknowledge their signature in the simultaneous presence of two or more witnesses.

4. Witnesses Attest and Sign: Each witness must then attest and sign the Will in the presence of the testator. (They do not need to be in the presence of each other).

The most crucial, and often misunderstood, element is ‘presence’. Historically, this means the signing must occur within the testator’s clear line of sight.

The Background: Coady v Coady (2025)

This case concerned Kathleen Bernadette Coady’s Will, which she made in April 2020 during the first national COVID-19 lockdown.

The 2020 Will appointed her son Gerard as the sole executor and primary beneficiary. This replaced an earlier Will, made in 2017 that had favoured another son, Peter.

Because of social distancing measures, the execution of the 2020 Will took place under unusual circumstances. Mrs. Coady, the deceased, sat just inside her open back door, while the two witnesses, neighbours David and Edna Meeson, stood outside in the garden, approximately nine to twelve feet away.

After her death, Peter challenged the Will, claiming that the Will was not properly signed and witnessed, and that his mother lacked testamentary capacity. However, the case ultimately centred on the failure to comply with the strict formalities of execution under Section 9. 

The Key Finding: No Line of Sight

The court heard conflicting accounts of the signing ceremony.

The witnesses, the Meesons, stated the process felt “hurried.” Crucially, they testified that Mrs Coady did not sign or acknowledge her signature while both of them were present at the same time. Furthermore, when they signed the document, she could not see them. They described the deceased as “frail and silent, ‘like a zombie’.”

However, Gerard’s account differed. He asserted that the solicitor’s instructions were followed exactly, the Will was read aloud to Kathleen Coady, and the witnesses observed Kathleen’s signature. She also greeted and thanked both witnesses. The court, however, regarded this evidence as suspicious and untrustworthy.

While Judge Phillips acknowledged that the temporary legislation extension permitting Wills to be executed via video conference during the pandemic (the Electronic Communications Amendment Coronavirus Order 2020), he emphasised that the requirements for simultaneous presence and acknowledgement still applied. The court found that Mrs Coady neither signed nor acknowledged her signature in the presence of two witnesses at the same time. Nor did the witnesses sign in her presence.

The court therefore declared the 2020 Will invalid.

What This Means for Your Will

Coady v Coady emphasises three essential points for anyone making or reviewing a Will in the UK.

1. The Law Demands Strict Compliance: Will formalities are strict. Courts will not relax these rules, even for understandable difficulties like those faced during the pandemic. The decision emphasises that simultaneous presence and line of sight are sacrosanct. The Will was signed in a way that created “reasonable doubt” over whether Mrs Coady and her witnesses could see each other signing.

2. Witness Credibility is Key: In this case, the court regarded the independent evidence of the two neighbours as more credible than the account of the beneficiary son (Gerard). If independent witnesses testify that the statutory requirements were not met, a Will can still be invalidated.

3. Review Any ‘Pandemic Wills’: The legislation that temporarily extended the rules to allow remote witnessing via video-conferencing during the pandemic ended in January 2024. However, you should immediately review any Wills executed under unusual, socially distanced circumstances like those in the Coady case. A legal professional can ensure they meet the formal validity requirements.

The Consequence of an Invalid Will

When a Will is successfully challenged, one of two outcomes occurs: 

1. The previous valid Will takes effect: This happened in the Coady case, where the 2017 Will was upheld, completely changing the distribution of the estate.

2. The Rules of Intestacy apply: If no prior valid Will exists, the Rules of Intestacy distribute the estate. This could mean your estate goes to people you never intended to benefit.

Our Advice

Don’t let a line-of-sight technicality jeopardise your legacy. Use an experienced lawyer to draft and supervise your Will’s execution. This ensures the process is correct and your wishes are legally protected. For help or advice about making a Will, or any other estate planning issue, please don’t hesitate to get in touch. We’re here to 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