A UK barrister accused of forging his late mother’s signature to exclude his younger brother from their inheritance has lost a High Court case involving their family’s £1.2 million fortune.
Robert Grierson, 56, a specialist in tax and will disputes, was taken to court by his 55-year-old brother, Duncan, after receiving almost the entire estate, leaving Duncan with just £10,000.
The case centered on allegations that Robert forged their mother Elise Grierson’s signature on a 2013 declaration of trust, which purportedly granted him half of her £1 million home in Sutton Coldfield. He also claimed Elise had altered her will in 2022, shortly after their father’s death, favoring him over Duncan.
However, Judge Joanne Wicks KC ruled that both the declaration of trust and the 2022 will were invalid. The judge concluded there was “compelling evidence” that Elise had not signed the trust document herself. Furthermore, the will was not properly witnessed, and Robert could not prove that his mother had been of sound mind when it was created.
During the trial, it was revealed that expert analysis showed Elise’s signature on the 2013 document was likely forged using a tracing guideline, indicating it was a simulation rather than her actual signature. Despite this, the court did not explicitly rule on whether Robert was responsible for the forgery, as he did not appear in court to defend himself.
Robert’s defense was struck out earlier this year after he failed to disclose key evidence. The case proceeded based solely on Duncan’s testimony and evidence.
The Grierson family had a history of treating both sons equally, according to Duncan’s barrister, Constance McDonnell KC. Elise and her husband, Robert Sr., were married for 60 years and had worked hard to support their children, both of whom attended the University of Cambridge to study law.
Following her husband’s death in January 2022, Elise experienced severe grief, depression, and declining health, passing away two months later at age 84. Duncan argued that Elise’s 2020 will, which divided the estate equally between the brothers, was her last valid will, and there was no credible reason for her to change it in the years that followed.
Judge Wicks upheld Duncan’s claims, invalidating the 2013 trust document and the 2022 will. The ruling leaves the estate to be divided as per the 2020 will, ensuring an equal share for both brothers.
The case highlights the complexities of inheritance disputes and the importance of proper documentation and mental soundness in will-making. It also serves as a reminder of the consequences of failing to provide credible evidence in court.
No comments:
Post a Comment