Will Law

764 Words4 Pages
Will Law A will is a legal document through which a person bequeaths his absolute properties, both immovable and movable to others. In this case, John who executes the will is called the testator, and has the major and sound mind to make the decision. John’ sister and his brother-in-law are the beneficiaries for this case. Under the Wills Act, they are called the legatees who can be relations or even strangers. A will comes into effect after the death of the testator, but can be changed by the testator if required. Obviously, John has the concern for the succession of his property after he dies. If he dies without a Will, or dies "intestate" as the law calls it, the property of the decedent is distributed according to a formula fixed by law. In other words, if you don't make a Will, you don't have any say about how your property will be distributed. Such proceedings could cost a lot of money and could create legal problems that might have been avoided by making a Will. By making a will, the settlement of John’s estate should proceed more quickly. John’s relations will not have to spend time in having the court appoint an administrator. This will save estate money as well. The testator, John, can revoke a will at any time. Even if the testator mentions in his will that it is irrevocable, the law does not recognize any will as irrevocable. The law permits change of the will as per the discretion of the testator at any time as Will is a document, which can be revoked at any time by the testator, since there is no consideration for the will. A free mind and personal wishes are essential for the validity of a will. A will executed... ... middle of paper ... ...agreement, the courts may permit the ignorant party to sue the other for damages. Illegality of any part of an agreement is ordinarily held to make the entire agreement void and unenforceable. However, it may be possible through terms severing the legal and illegal portions to secure partial recovery. If a contract provided for delivery of legal and illegal goods, and they were priced separately, the seller may be able to collect for the legal goods. The court may view the situation as if there were two contracts. The illegal contract would be void but the legal contract would not be void. Conclusion ---------- As it is an illegal contract from the very beginning that the entire agreement is void and unenforceable, and Peter is innocent as well. It is not reasonable from Peter to sue Mary for the damage

More about Will Law

Open Document