- Retrial ordered after incorrect approach to evidence assessment (Brunt v Wrangle)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Private Client analysis: The court held that the master had approached his assessment of the evidence incorrectly, as he followed the approach to the assessment of evidence and making a finding of facts set out in Re Parsonage. Furthermore, in his judgment, the master did not deal with all the witnesses, their possible motives for lying and the extent to which the master had relied on their demeanor. It was therefore unclear how the master concluded that one party’s witnesses should be believed over the others. The master also failed to give weight to the evidence indicating forgery, such as the clear expert evidence that the Will had not been signed in 1999. As a result, a retrial was ordered. Written by Rachel Leech, associate solicitor at Birkett Long LLP.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial