CONTENTIOUS PROBATE
Tristram & Coote’s Probate Practice (27th edn) PART II Chap. 26 p.567 et
seq.
Tristram & Coote’s Probate Practice (30th edn) PART II Chap. 26 p.759 et
seq.
Parry & Kerridge: The Law of Succession (12th edn.) Ch. 18 pp. 427-428
(Revocation of a grant in common form); Ch. 18 pp. 427-429 (Proof of a
Will in solemn form).; Chap. 19 pp.449-451 (“Caveats and Citations”); pp.
466-471 (“The Revocation of Grants”); Ch. 25 pp. 607-619
(“Administration Proceedings”).
Sawyer, Caroline: Principles of Succession, Wills & Probate (2nd edn.) Ch.
12 pp. 279-281
TABLE OF STATUTES
BELIZE:
Supreme Court of Judicature Ordinances
Rules of Court
JAMAICA:
Alvarez v. Chandler (1962) 5 WIR 226 (CA T&T; 1935 and 1940
Wills; probate in common form of 1935 document; probate in
solemn form sought of 1940 one; challenge to 100 year-old
testatrix’s capacity)
Wallace & Lemard v. Ramsay & Box SCCA No. 127/98 delivered
Nov. 29, 1999 (CA of Jamaica; application to set aside Letters of
Administration previously granted and for grant of probate in
solemn form; whether the evidence of witness may be given via
video link); and
NB: Not all matters in court are “contentious”. The nature of the approach
by the interested parties is instructive in determining whether the matter is
contentious.
Executors – They get their locus standi through the Will and /or
Codicil. It must be noted that any testamentary document through
which they claim must be probated in order to obviate a challenge
to the executor’s status.
10. COSTS – The general rule is that the awarding of costs in a probate
claim is solely within the discretion of the court. Additionally, costs
usually follow the event and a successful party will be entitled to an
award of costs. For example, if a Defendant insists that a Will is
invalid and that it should be proved in solemn form he, if unsuccessful
at trial, will be ordered to pay costs unless he had reasonable grounds
for his stance. Vide Twist v. Tye [1902] P. 92.
Ian G. Wilkinson QC
Guest Lecturer
March 10, 2015