A woman has lost her final appeal challenging her father's decision to leave her out of his will and bequeath his entire estate to a religious charity he supported.
In a judgment delivered last Friday, three Law Lords of the United Kingdom-based Privy Council dismissed the appeal brought by Aneisa Graham against Gregory Pascall, who was appointed as executor of her father's will.
Graham's father Carl Cox died at his home on December 23, 2012.
In his purported last will, dated January 6, 2009, Cox, a father of three, left his entire estate to the Eternal Light Community of Tunapuna, a charity associated with the Roman Catholic Church.
When Pascall attempted to probate the will, Graham challenged the procedure on the basis that it (the will) was not duly executed, it was not done with knowledge and approval and there was undue influence.
In January 2017, High Court Judge Nadia Kangaloo refused probate on the first two grounds.
Pascall appealed and the challenge was upheld by the Court of Appeal in November 2022.
Graham filed a final appeal in which she maintained that the will was not done with knowledge and approval.
Lords Michael Briggs, George Leggatt, and David Richards agreed with the decision of the local appellate court to uphold the legality of the will.
Lord Briggs noted that the will could not be invalidated based on there being no evidence of Cox receiving independent legal advice before signing it.
"The Court of Appeal concluded, quite robustly, that he did not need it, being an independent person in good mental and physical health who was free to dispose of his property as he pleased," he said.
"The Board agrees that this lack of evidence goes nowhere to displacing the positive evidence of knowledge and approval," he added.
Stating that Cox had full testamentary capacity when he made the will, Lord Briggs said: "This means (among other things) that he had a proper understanding of the identity of those persons who might be said to have a moral claim on his bounty, and must therefore at least have had in mind whether or not to benefit his daughter, before deciding not to do so, as he was free to do."
He also pointed out that the will was not a complex legal document.
"Next, and most compelling of all, the will was an extremely short and simple one-page document... It was read over to him shortly before he executed it, and he could not have been unaware (if in sound mind) that this is what he was doing by executing the will," Lord Briggs said.
Lord Briggs also noted that Cox kept a copy of the will and gave it to Pascall shortly before his death.
"This is not one of those cases where a testator executes a will which is then held by lawyers or other family members, without him ever seeing it again," he said.
Graham was represented by Keston McQuilkin, and Wayne Smart. Pascall was represented by Margaret Rose, and Dana-Marie Smith.
