Dispute Over Missing Wills: Packer vs Packer

Introduction

On 8 January 2025, the High Court of Justice in Bristol conducted a pre-trial review concerning a family dispute over the estate of the late Stephen George Packer. The case, presided over by HHJ Paul Matthews, involved a claim by the deceased's widow, Debra Ellen Packer, against his sister, Lynn Ann Packer.

Background

Stephen George Packer passed away from cancer on 5 July 2022. The claimant, Debra Ellen Packer, asserted that he died intestate, whereas the defendant, Lynn Ann Packer, claimed that he had made two wills, one in 2017 and another in 2022, appointing her as executrix. These wills, however, could not be located.

The claimant sought letters of administration to manage the deceased's estate, while the defendant opposed this, urging the court to uphold the 2022 will.

Claimant's Application

At the pre-trial review, the claimant applied to amend her Reply to remove allegations of fraud against the defendant concerning the creation of the 2017 and 2022 wills. The defendant consented to this amendment, and the court granted it. However, the issue of costs related to this application remained unresolved.

Legal Context

The case centred on the administration of the deceased's estate and the validity of alleged wills. The claimant's initial allegations of fraud were based on the absence of the original wills and the defendant's inconsistent positions. The claimant later withdrew these allegations after obtaining metadata confirming the creation dates of the wills.

Costs and Conduct

The court considered the costs of the application to amend the Reply. Under the Civil Procedure Rules, costs are typically awarded to the successful party, but the court has discretion to decide otherwise based on the conduct of the parties.

The claimant argued that the delay in obtaining metadata justified her initial allegations. However, the court found that the claimant's conduct in alleging fraud without sufficient evidence was unreasonable.

Judgment

HHJ Paul Matthews ruled that the claimant should pay the defendant's costs of the application. The court emphasised the seriousness of alleging fraud and the necessity of having credible material to support such claims.

Conclusion

The judgment highlighted the importance of careful consideration before making serious allegations in court proceedings. The case is scheduled for trial from 12 to 14 February 2025, where the substantive issues regarding the estate and the validity of the wills will be addressed.

Learn More

For more information on probate disputes, see BeCivil's guide to UK Probate Law.

Copyright & permissions