A life interest trust must be understood, not simply signed
A recent High Court decision offers a reminder for anyone taking will instructions: a client’s signature does not, by itself, establish that they understood the effect of a provision in their Will.
The case at a glance
In Elliott v Bateson [2026] EWHC 2440 (Ch), a new Will replaced an outright gift to the testator’s wife with a life interest in half his estate. The court was not satisfied that he understood how this would limit her access to the capital.
Mark Briant’s earlier Will had left half his estate to his wife, Rosemary Elliott, outright. Under the Will he signed in 2022, she would instead receive a life interest in that half, with the capital ultimately passing to his daughter.
That change mattered. An outright gift would have given Mrs Elliott the money to use as she wished. The life interest trust would have limited her access to the capital. The court was not satisfied that Mr Briant understood this practical difference when he signed the Will.
The issue was knowledge and approval
The challenge did not turn on whether Mr Briant had the capacity to make a Will. Nor did the court find that the new Will had been procured by undue influence. The question was whether he knew and approved its contents, particularly the provision replacing his wife’s outright gift with a life interest.
The solicitor who prepared the Will had met Mr Briant and intended to give appropriate advice. However, the judge found insufficient evidence that the effect of the trust had been clearly explained. The Will was not read over to Mr Briant at the signing appointment, and the evidence that he had read it himself was weak.
The court concluded that Mr Briant had not understood that his wife would be unable to draw on the capital if she wanted or needed it. It ordered the wording creating the life interest trust to be removed, leaving the gift of half the estate to her outright.
What should Willwriters take from the case?
A trust can sound like a sensible solution in the abstract. The client also needs to understand what it will mean for the people affected by it.
Explain the practical effect
Where a proposed provision changes an outright gift into a limited interest, the discussion should cover questions such as:
- Can the beneficiary spend the capital?
- What income might the fund produce?
- Who controls access to the fund?
- What would happen if the beneficiary needed money for care or other substantial costs?
These questions are especially important when an adviser proposes a structure that differs from the client’s initial instructions. The adviser should explain the change in plain language and check the client’s understanding of its consequences.
Record the client’s decision
A clear attendance note should record the client’s own wishes, the options discussed, the explanation given and why the client chose the final arrangement. Where relatives have helped prepare notes or arrange an appointment, it is important to establish the client’s instructions directly.
Use the signing meeting
The signing meeting is another opportunity to check understanding. Reading or explaining the relevant provisions, and inviting the client to describe what they expect to happen, can reveal a misunderstanding before the Will is executed.
The key takeaway
When a Will contains a trust, the client needs to understand the effect of that trust, not merely recognise the words on the page.
This article is a general discussion for Willwriting professionals and is not legal advice on any individual matter.
Further reading: Elliott v Bateson [2026] EWHC 2440 (Ch)
and
STEP UK News Digest.