The relatives of a determined 92-year-old woman, Carry Keats, are embroiled in a £800,000 court dispute after she partially tore up her will on her deathbed, as reported by The Times.
The incident has led to a legal battle between her five cousins and her younger sister, Josephine Oakley.
While hospitalised, Keats ripped through three-quarters of her will, a move that has raised questions about its legal validity. Lawyers have informed a High Court judge that Victorian legislation allows for a will to be revoked by tearing it up, provided legal requirements are followed.
If the court determines that Keats legally destroyed her will and died intestate, her sister Oakley will inherit the entire estate. However, the cousins—who were named beneficiaries in the original will—have challenged this, arguing that Keats was too physically weak to fully tear the document. They claim the will should remain valid since she only managed to rip it three-quarters of the way, with the rest being completed by her solicitor on her instructions.
David Crew, the cousins’ representative, has argued that Keats wanted to disinherit her sister due to a strained relationship, accusing Oakley of committing adultery in the past—allegations Oakley denies. The cousins claim Keats, who owned a caravan site, lacked the mental capacity to change her mind so close to death.
Oakley, who disputes the adultery allegations, stated in court that Keats tore up the will in reaction to the cousins’ suggestion that she be placed in a care home. Oakley also said that disinheriting the cousins would align with their father’s wishes. She testified that in Keats’s final years, the two sisters grew closer, with Oakley visiting her regularly and taking her out for Sunday roast dinners.
Keats died in 2022, just weeks after the incident, leaving an estate valued at £800,000, primarily comprising her home and land in Nomansland, Wiltshire. Her solicitor, Hafwen Webb, described Keats as a long-standing client whose personality remained unchanged despite her age and illness. Webb affirmed that Keats was fully aware of her actions when she started tearing the will.
The case hinges on the interpretation of the Wills Act 1837, which dictates that for a will’s destruction to be valid, the testator must either destroy the will themselves or properly authorise someone else to do so. The cousins’ lawyer, Simon Sinnatt, argued that since Keats’s solicitor finished tearing the will, this could invalidate the act due to “lack of authority.” Additionally, he suggested that Keats may have lacked the mental capacity to provide legal consent at the time.
Judge John Linwood has reserved his ruling for a later date.
