Ugolor v Ugolor [2026] EWHC 745 (Ch) set aside a homemade 2008 Will — not for lack of capacity, and not for undue influence, but for want of knowledge and approval.
- The Will had plainly been drafted by the son who was the main beneficiary.
- It used his formal name throughout, though his mother never called him that.
- The language was lawyerly, well beyond anything she would have written.
- Children she had raised got nothing; people she had not known for decades received a substantial legacy.
- Capacity failed as a ground — her delusions did not go to capacity, and forgetting one modest asset proved nothing.
- Undue influence failed too: no evidence of actual coercion.
- Indemnity costs followed the beneficiary’s persistent non-compliance with court orders.
The lesson: knowledge and approval is the quieter, more winnable ground — and a Will typed up by the person who benefits invites suspicion. Independent drafting, plain language and a contemporaneous record of instructions are what hold up in court.
Read the full article on our website →
Get Legacy Insights free every Sunday
Six short reads each week on tax, Wills, family wealth and running a business, from John Ireland. Since 1996, three decades of protecting families.