Estate with two widows: bigamy and 1975 Act inheritance claims

James Dinsdale, a former accountant and property developer, died in 2020, leaving a £1.8 million Estate. Mr Dinsdale died without leaving a Will, meaning his estate was due to be distributed in accordance with the intestacy rules.

Mr Dinsdale had married Dr Victoria Fowell, a cosmetic dentist, in 2012 in Las Vegas. Mrs Margaret Dinsdale, a beautician, had first met Mr Dinsdale in 2008 before beginning a relationship with him in 2014. Mrs Dinsdale was unaware of Mr Dinsdale’s marriage to Dr Fowell. Mr Dinsdale and Dr Fowell later separated but never divorced. Mr Dinsdale went on to marry Mrs Dinsdale, again in Las Vegas, in 2017. Mrs Dinsdale was unaware of her husband’s ongoing marriage to Dr Fowell.

Given his first marriage to Dr Fowell, Mr Dinsdale’s second marriage was considered void. Under the intestacy rules, his estate would automatically pass to Dr Fowell, as his legal wife, and his adult son. Mrs Dinsdale had no automatic right to inherit from the estate under the intestacy rules, despite living with Mr Dinsdale prior to his death, being financially dependent on him and being his primary carer in his ill health.

Mrs Dinsdale made a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, on the basis that she was a spouse of the Deceased.

The Law

The key question in all 1975 Act claims is "has the deceased's estate made reasonable financial provision for the category of the potential claimant?” Determining the category of claimant is key to determining this question.

For a Claimant who is the spouse or civil partner of the deceased (or others who are treated as spouses or civil partners), the provision required is based on what it is reasonable for the claimant to receive, whether or not it is needed for their financial maintenance.

For any other category of claimant, the standard is "such financial provision as it would be reasonable in all the circumstances of the case for the applicant to receive for their maintenance."

The Court must then consider a number of factors outlined in the 1975 Act, known as the “Section 3 factors”, when deciding what constitutes reasonable financial provision in each case. For a spouse or civil partner, a key factor for the court to consider is what may have been awarded had the marriage or civil partnership been terminated by the court, as opposed to being terminated by the death of the Deceased.

The Decision of the High Court

In a preliminary hearing, counsel representing Mrs Dinsdale pointed out to the Court that there was “no evidence” that she was aware of Mr Dinsdale’s marriage to Dr Fowell, as she had understood their marriage to have ended some years before beginning her relationship with Mr Dinsdale. Counsel also indicated that Dr Fowell had a lack of “financial need”, given she had received a £2 million lump sum and property from Mr Dinsdale when their relationship ended.

The Judge ruled that it was “not disputed” that Mrs Dinsdale was a spouse for the purposes of the 1975 Act, and therefore eligible to bring a claim against the estate. Further, Mrs Dinsdale was awarded an interim distribution from the estate of £50,000 to assist her with household bills and her legal fees.

This is not the first time a court has accepted that there may be more than one spouse in a marriage for claims under the 1975 Act. A notable decision in the case of Official Solicitor v Yemoh [2010] EWHC 3727 (Ch) acknowledged that spouses in a polygamous marriage should be recognised for succession.

Key Takeaways

For individuals considering how they wish for their estate to be distributed, this case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of preparing a Will, particularly for those who enter a marriage and thereafter, separation and/or divorce.

For this case, we are reminded that cohabiting partners who do not have a Will are unlikely to be able to adequately protect the financial needs of their loved one. Without a Will, surviving cohabiting partners are often faced with pursuing a claim for financial provision under the 1975 Act to ensure their financial needs are supported moving forward.

From the Court's perspective, this case reminds us that spouses of void marriages do not automatically inherit from an intestate estate. There may be cases where the court is willing to make decisions as to the application of the 1975 Act and the categories of claimant provided for, based on the specific circumstances of the case.

Prompt, specialist advice as to the interpretation of the 1975 Act is essential if you consider you should have received payment from an estate and may have a claim.

How Can Forbes Help You

As dedicated Contentious Probate practitioners, we can support you in navigating estate disputes and claims under the 1975 Act. We have extensive experience in supporting a wide range of claimants and defendants in claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 and guiding them to a positive outcome.

Whether you are an executor, beneficiary, applicant, or legal professional, we pride ourselves on providing straightforward, prompt and practical legal advice to support you in navigating estate disputes and prioritising your interests. For a confidential consultation, call 0800 689 3607 to speak with a member of our team.