EWJ 60 April 2025 web - Journal - Page 97
The Case of the Missing Wills – Case
Note: Packer v Packer [2025] EWHC
461 (Ch)
by Ollie Murrell and Zachariah Pullar - www.guildhallchambers.co.uk
after some 12 months of asking, produced by Lynn.
There was no evidence (or case) that the 2017 draft
was ever executed by Stephen. Rather, Lynn sought to
propound the 2022 draft (“the 2022 Will”).
Introduction
Following a three-day trial, Hugh Sims KC sitting as a
Deputy High Court Judge (“the Judge”) handed
down judgment in Packer v Packer [2025] EWHC 461
(Ch) (“the Judgment”). Ollie Murrell, instructed by
Bailhache Law, acted for the successful Claimant.
Lynn’s ultimate position was that Debra had likely
found the two wills when she searched Renditt after
Stephen’s death, and upon realising they did not leave
everything to her, destroyed them.
At the heart of the case was a mystery drama appropriate to the fiction of Agatha Christie: the case of
Stephen Packer’s missing wills.
The dispute then grew further heads: firstly, Lynn alleged Debra had forged Stephen’s signature on a TR1
form which transferred Renditt into their joint names
in 2012; secondly, Debra alleged a lifetime disclaimer
by Stephen of his share of Joan’s estate, in Lynn’s
favour, was forged by Lynn. Both disputes are/were
the subject of separate proceedings, and the Judge
considered them only to the extent they informed the
will dispute.
Put in less dramatic terms, did the late Stephen Packer
die intestate, as his widow, Debra, claimed; or did he
validly execute a will during his lifetime, as his sole
surviving sister, Lynn, claimed – despite that no such
will could be found after his death?
The case serves as a rare example – the first in 18 years
– of a successful application of the presumption of revocation of a will, and Mr Sims KC has extended the
scope of the presumption of due execution.
The Judgment
At trial, Lynn’s case and evidence was that she typed
the 2022 Will up on her computer, printed it off, and
gave it to Stephen, who signed it before it was then
signed and attested in Stephen’s presence by two of
Lynn’s family members: Clive, her long-term partner,
and Giles, her son. Immediately after this, Lynn undertook some research online and advised Stephen
that family members could not witness a will, and he
therefore needed to take the will to be independently
witnessed. Clive and Giles gave identical evidence.
Background
Stephen and Debra married in 2006. They lived in
their marital home, Renditt, in Bristol, which Stephen
bought in his sole name. Unlike the testator at the
heart of Agatha Christie’s missing will story, Stephen’s
only real friends were his family. He was a parsimonious man who did not like to spend money unnecessarily, not least on solicitors. Stephen was diagnosed
with cancer in 2010, from which he died in July 2022.
Stephen’s sister and the Defendant, Lynn, spent much
of her working life living abroad; despite having only
periodic contact, she and her family had a good relationship with Stephen. Lynn returned to the UK at
the start of 2021, following the death in June 2020 of
her and Stephen’s mother, Joan.
However, Lynn’s pleaded case was that Stephen
signed the 2022 Will before taking it away to be witnessed by unknown third-party witnesses – not that it
was signed and attested by Clive and Giles in his presence. The fact she was a litigant in person did not justify the court interpreting her defence as disclosing a
case that was simply not set out; nor was an application
made to amend after she was legally represented
([110]-[122] of the Judgment).
Before Stephen’s death, Debra and Lynn had a good
relationship. As is so common, their friendship
quickly soured after Stephen’s death largely due to
Lynn’s perception that Debra was failing to honour
his wishes and Lynn’s retention of Joan’s estate. The
fall-out took various forms in the aftermath of
Stephen’s death: Lynn’s entered a caveat in Stephen’s
estate just days after his death, followed by varied
threats and accusations.
However, the Judge went on to consider the substance
of the case, on two primary issues.
(1) Executed in compliance with s.9?
Absent the executed 2022 Will, Lynn had to rely on
parol evidence of due execution ([10] of the
Judgment).
After Stephen’s death, Renditt was searched several
times: no will, executed or draft, was found. Believing
Stephen died intestate, although contrary to Lynn’s
assertions, Debra applied to the High Court for letters of administration.
Unknown to Debra, Stephen had twice asked Lynn to
help him prepare a will: once in December 2017, and
once on 21 February 2022. Unsigned drafts were,
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
The difficulty for Lynn, as anticipated by the gap between her pleaded case and case at trial, was the version of events at trial was another (indeed, the fifth)
iteration of a case which had continually shifted since
Stephen’s death. In the days post-death, Lynn said she
had helped to prepare a will for Stephen which he
had taken to be independently witnessed – witnesses
95
APRIL 2025
