Court adjusts will for daughter who was left out

ONE OF two sisters who was left out of their late mother's will despite devoting herself for a long time to the care of her disabled sister "in difficult circumstances" has won her High Court challenge to that will.

The mother had left her entire estate, valued at up to €2.75 million, to the disabled sister ("A") until her (the mother's) death - after which it was to pass to a niece, who was also appointed sole guardian of A.

Mr Justice Brian McGovern ruled yesterday the mother had failed in her moral duty to properly provide for "B", a separated mother in her 40s, when she knew, or should have known, that B was in the best position to look after A, who is in her 30s, intellectually disabled and cannot manage her own affairs.

Sister B was of limited income and would be unable to look after her sister in the long term without provision from the estate, he noted.

The judge made an order varying the terms of the will so that, on the death of A, the mother's estate will be divided equally between B and the niece. He also appointed B and the niece as joint guardians of A until A's death and created a discretionary trust in favour of A, to be administered jointly by B and the niece as trustees until A's death.

A care worker had told the court A had a life expectancy of 60 or 70 years and would become extremely distressed if taken into care.

The judge said he found B to be an honest and truthful witness who has given a great deal of her life to looking after her sister and he believed she would continue to do so. Given his decision on B's case, the judge made no order on separate proceedings in which it was argued on behalf of A that her needs would be best met by living at home with B.

The dispute arose after the mother, who cannot be identified, died in the late 1990s. She left the two daughters and a will bequeathing her entire estate - a Georgian house said to be in a dangerous state of repair and some lands - to A until A's death, when it would pass to the niece.

In proceedings under the Succession Act, B challenged the will, alleging her late mother failed in her moral duty to make proper provision for her.

The judge noted the mother was the sole carer of A until her death, but that both the mother and A were dependent on B from time to time as the mother's health deteriorated. He also noted B and her mother had a relationship which was "out of the ordinary" and the mother had not approved of B's estranged husband.

B said she had lived near her mother and sister until she moved into their home after her mother's health deteriorated from the late 1980s. The mother was also close to her niece, who is older than B.

The judge said it was easy to understand B's resentment that her mother had made the niece A's guardian and she would inherit the estate on the death of A. Nothing was left to B by her mother.

The niece had herself done nothing to warrant B's resentment and struck him as a person of "the utmost integrity", the judge said. The niece accepted B has been the principal carer of A for a long time and had expressed shock there was no provision in the will for B.