Case Study: Inheritance Disputes following Adoption

EMMA COULSON -v- RONALD IVOR JAMES PAUL

A recent case heard in the High Court involved an inheritance dispute where the claimant, Ms Coulson, sought to inherit her biological grandfather's estate, despite having been adopted. However, the claim was defended by the Claimant’s biological Uncle, who stood to inherit the entire estate should the claim fail.

At an early age, Ms Coulson was adopted by her mother’s new husband. However, in 2004, she began a relationship with her biological father, John Paul. The pair developed a strong relationship over the years, with Ms Coulson being named in John’s will as his daughter.

As Ms Coulson developed her relationship with John, she also alleged to have developed a relationship with her biological grandfather, Allan Paul. Allan was the father of brothers John and Ronald (the Defendant).

Unfortunately, Allan passed away in April 2021. In his will that was executed in 2012, Allan left his entire estate to John "provided always that if he shall pre-decease me leaving a child or children him surviving then such child or children shall take and if more than one equally between them the whole of my estate which their late father would have inherited had he so survived me." John did predecease his father by some months.

The will made no provision for Ronald, whom Allan felt he had already provided for during his lifetime. Allan had also prepared a side letter explaining this intention, but at the time of his death this had not been signed.

Ms Coulson sought to claim her inheritance under the above clause, as the child of John.

Ms Coulson's legal team argued that the will should be interpreted or rectified (amended) to include her as a child of John, given their relationship at the time of death.

However, Ronald’s position was that just because Paul saw Ms Coulson as a daughter, this did not mean that Allan considered her a grandchild. He also argued that legally, Ms Coulson was not John's child due to her adoption. Therefore, she could not be considered his child under Allan’s will and was not eligible to inherit the estate.  

This case required the court to consider section 67 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, which sets out the effect of adoption in law. According to the act, the adopted person is to be treated in law as if born as the child of the adopter[s].

In this case, the Judge decided that there was an absence of contrary indication which would justify deviating from a literal interpretation of the law, and it was determined that Ms Coulson was and remains the daughter of her adoptive father.

Finally, on the matter of rectification, the court considered section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982. This section allows a court to rectify a will, if it is not expressing the testator's intentions due to a clerical error or the will draftsman's failure to understand the testator's instructions. However, the Judge concluded neither of these had occurred, and there was no justification for rectifying the will.

Therefore, Ms Coulson's claim was dismissed, and the entire estate would be inherited by Ronald under the intestacy rules.

This judgment has not only provided important guidance on the interpretation of wills in the context of adopted children and the legal principles governing such cases, but also shows how crucial it is to ensure that your will clearly expresses your wishes.

Our knowledgeable commercial litigation team has experience acting for both Claimant’s and Defendant’s in Wills and Probate disputes. Whether you are looking to bring a dispute, or find yourself having to defend one, our solicitors are on hand discuss your matter in detail.

For a free no obligation discussion, please contact us on 0121 355 0011 to see how we may be able to help you.