In 2019, Ms Kars filed for divorce, and a Decree Absolute was granted within the same year. Her former husband subsequently passed away in 2021, with the financial proceedings related to the marriage remaining unresolved at the time of his death.
Central to the dispute was a property occupied by the deceased’s son, which raised the question of whether Ms Kars possessed a beneficial interest in that property.
With the husband having died intestate, the son stood to inherit the property according to the rules of intestacy, and Ms Kars, having divorced, was not eligible as a beneficiary under those rules.
As the sole caregiver for her disabled son, Ms Kars submitted a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, arguing that the distribution of the estate under intestacy failed to provide reasonable financial provision for her.
The court found that both the Claimant and the Deceased held beneficial ownership of the property, awarding Ms Kars a 50% share, with the remaining 50% remaining in the Estate.
Pursuant to the 1975 Act, the court further determined that the intestacy regime did not furnish reasonable provision for the Claimant in her capacity as caregiver to a child with special needs. Consequently, the court ordered the transfer of the remaining share of the property from the Estate to the Claimant.
