**Exploring the Boundaries of the Inheritance Act: A Deep Dive into Ilott v Mitson**

“`html

The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth: Opening the Floodgates in Inheritance Act Actions?

Date: 4th August 2015

Introduction

The landmark case of Ilott v Mitson [2015] EWCA Civ 797 has recently captured the public’s attention. It tells the story of a woman estranged from her mother for over two decades, who was awarded a portion of her late mother’s estate, despite explicit wishes to the contrary. This case has sparked a debate on the rights of estranged family members under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, raising questions about the future of inheritance law.

The Ilott Case

Mrs. Ilott, the applicant, found herself estranged from her mother at the age of 17 due to her relationship choices, leading to a 26-year separation. Despite attempts at reconciliation, the estrangement lasted until her mother’s death. Mrs. Ilott, now with a family of her own living in challenging financial circumstances, was left out of her mother’s will, which instead favoured several charities.

The estate, valued at £486,000, was contested by Mrs. Ilott under the Inheritance Act, leading to a legal battle that would eventually see her awarded £143,000 to purchase her home and an additional £20,000 for immediate financial needs, significantly altering the original distribution of the estate.

Discussion

This case underscores the nuanced interpretation of “reasonable maintenance” for non-spousal claimants under the Inheritance Act. The Court of Appeal’s decision to increase Mrs. Ilott’s award highlights the balancing act between respecting the wishes of the deceased and ensuring the welfare of those left behind. The ruling also brings to light the impact of such awards on state benefits, a key consideration in the court’s deliberation.

While the facts of Ilott v Mitson are unique, the case sets a precedent that could influence future Inheritance Act claims. It serves as a reminder of the importance of clear evidence and realistic claims in inheritance disputes. Moreover, it emphasizes the court’s discretion in achieving what it deems a “just” result, taking into account the individual circumstances of each case.

Conclusion

The Ilott case may not open the floodgates for all disappointed adult children to challenge wills under the Inheritance Act, but it certainly paves the way for more claims to be considered. It highlights the importance of considering the potential for such claims when drafting a will and the need for clear documentation of one’s wishes regarding estate distribution. As inheritance disputes become more common, the principles laid out in Ilott v Mitson will likely play a crucial role in guiding both claimants and courts through the complex terrain of family provision claims.

“`