Blog
Rayner my parade! The importance of specialist advice.
Jemma Brimblecombe
On 13 June the High Court handed down judgment in the case of Gupta v Aggrawala and others, a claim brought by Rakesh Gupta who alleged that his late mother’s will (which favoured Rakesh’s younger brother, Naresh) was invalid due to lack of knowledge and approval. Kingsley Napley acted for Naresh in successfully defending the claim, with the Judge concluding that Rakesh had not shown any suspicious circumstances at all in relation to the testatrix’s knowledge and approval of the will.
The recent judgment in the case of Habberfield v Habberfield [2018] EWHC 317 Ch is another of a growing number of judgments in which the claimant (and disappointed beneficiary) has pursued a claim on the grounds of proprietary estoppel.
The High Court recently exercised its discretion pursuant to Section 2 of the Forfeiture Act 1982 (“FA 1982”) in the case of Macmillan Cancer Support v Hayes and Long [2017] EWHC 3110.
The decision in the case of Sargeant v Sargeant [2018]EWHC 8 Ch was handed down last week. The Court held that the widow of a farmer was too late to make an application for reasonable financial provision from her husband’s estate; having made the application more than 10 years after the grant of probate was obtained.
The annual statistics for The Royal Courts of Justice, January to December 2016 were recently released.
Jemma Brimblecombe
Charles Richardson
Oliver Oldman
Legal Notices | Privacy Notice | Fraud Warning | Modern Slavery Statement | Complaints | Website Terms | Cookie Policy | Accessibility | Site Map
© 2025 Kingsley Napley LLP. All rights reserved. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, registration number 500046.
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility