James Dinsdale, an accountant, died in 2020 leaving behind an estate worth £1.8 million. James was survived by his legal wife, Dr Victoria Fowell, and his partner Margaret Dinsdale. James had married Victoria in Las Vegas in 2012. They later separated but never divorced.
In 2017 James purported to marry his new partner, Margaret, (again in Las Vegas). However, apparently unbeknownst to Margaret, he was still legally married to Victoria. As James had never divorced his first wife, his marriage to Margaret was not legally valid.
James died without a Will, meaning that the distribution of his estate is governed by the intestacy rules. Under the intestacy rules his estate stood to be divided between Victoria as his legal wife and his adult son, with Margaret to receive nothing.
Margaret brought a claim against James’ estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (often known as the “1975 Act”).
The 1975 Act allows certain categories of people to bring claims against an estate if reasonable financial provision has not been made for them. Spouses are one of the categories of people who are entitled to bring these claims.
In a preliminary hearing the Court recognised Margaret as James’ “spouse” for the purposes of the 1975 Act, despite the fact that James and Margaret were not legally married. This is important because spouses are treated more favourably than other categories of claimant under the 1975 Act. Spouses are entitled to claim for reasonable financial provision (being such provision as is reasonable in all of the circumstances). This differs from other categories of claimant, who can only bring claims for such financial provision as it would be reasonable for them to receive for their maintenance. Maintenance is not legally defined but is generally accepted to mean provision for day to day living expenses.
Margaret had been James’ carer towards the end of his life (following his cancer diagnosis) and was financially dependent on him. As such, Margaret would also likely have been able to bring a claim under the 1975 Act on the basis that she was co-habiting with James and financially maintained by him, even if she was not recognised as his wife. However, if Margaret’s claim had proceeded on this basis then the financial provision which she could have been awarded would have been limited to her maintenance needs (for example to provide housing or to meet a shortfall in her income).
In recognising Margaret as a spouse, the Court acted flexibly to accommodate the reality of Margaret’s unusual situation (with her having believed herself to be legally married, and unaware that the marriage was in fact legally void). By taking this flexible approach the Court has ensured that Margaret will be able to receive greater financial provision. Whilst the amount of the financial provision is still to be determined, Margaret was awarded an interim payment of £50,000 to help fund her legal costs.
If you are concerned about the inheritance that you will receive from your spouse or partner, then please get in touch, and one of our specialist team will be happy to help.