Randall v Randall

This judgment resolves a preliminary issue in a contentious probate claim brought by the former husband (the Claimant) of Hilary Ann Jocelyn Randall (the Defendant), the only child and executrix of Sylvia Joyce Corrall, deceased. The Claimant sought pronouncement against Corralls will and revocation of the grant, alleging invalid execution under the Wills Act 1837, and relied on a 2006 divorce Consent Order entitling him to share any inheritance the Defendant receives beyond a3100,000. The court framed procedural and substantive questions and held that standing in probate requires a substantive common law interest in the estate, not a mere procedural requirement. It rejected analogies to judicial reviews broad public interest standing and determined that the Consent Order creates only a personal debt obligation contingent on receipt, not an estate interest. Concluding that the Claimant lacks standing, the court noted he would need to defeat both the disputed Will and an earlier will, and observed that contemporaneous solicitor evidence strongly supports due execution.