Law provides minimum two witness should subscribe the Will, to have a valid Will two witness is needed. Is it necessary that there be two witnesses? It appears that there is more than one reason for this safeguard.
First, there is greater likelihood of at least one witness still being available at the time of application for probate should evidence as to the circumstances of the will-making be required.
Second, the rule requiring two witnesses provides a greater safeguard against forgery and undue influence than would a rule requiring only one. There has been a call for a provision to include the recognition of 'self-proving' wills whereby the signing of the will is notarised by one person of appropriate standing. Assuming the formalities of notarisation are carried out correctly, testamentary intention could be presumed. Two witnesses present at the same time: The requirement that both witnesses are simultaneously present at the time the testator signs (or acknowledges his or her signature) is designed to prevent forgery and fraud, and to ensure that the testator is fully aware of the seriousness of the occasion. However, there is no requirement that the witnesses sign in the presence of each other. Currently, it is possible, so long as the testator has signed or acknowledged his or her signature in the presence of both witnesses at the same time, for the witnesses to attest on separate occasions so long as they do so in the presence of the testator. Following on from that, a question arises about whether both witnesses need to witness the same act.
Is it necessary for the testator to sign or acknowledge in the presence of both witnesses at the same time, or could this be done serially? In ordinary circumstances it would appear that there should be no problem in the witnesses signing serially. However, there are certain circumstances where problems could arise. For example, if there is a time-delay between the signing the testator may attempt to alter the provisions of the will before the second witness signs. Such alterations would fall outside the strict attestation requirements.
Confusion could also arise regarding the date of execution. If dates are given with each signature, at what point would the will be deemed to have been executed? There could be some advantage in permitting some form of serial witnessing but acknowledges that serial witnessing may give opportunity for confusion. On the balance it is contended that it is preferable that both witnesses be present
The Author K.P.Satish Kumar M.L. is the leading Probate and Will lawyer. You can get free legal advise on Probate and Will to the team Daniel & Daniel @ 9840802218.
First, there is greater likelihood of at least one witness still being available at the time of application for probate should evidence as to the circumstances of the will-making be required.
Second, the rule requiring two witnesses provides a greater safeguard against forgery and undue influence than would a rule requiring only one. There has been a call for a provision to include the recognition of 'self-proving' wills whereby the signing of the will is notarised by one person of appropriate standing. Assuming the formalities of notarisation are carried out correctly, testamentary intention could be presumed. Two witnesses present at the same time: The requirement that both witnesses are simultaneously present at the time the testator signs (or acknowledges his or her signature) is designed to prevent forgery and fraud, and to ensure that the testator is fully aware of the seriousness of the occasion. However, there is no requirement that the witnesses sign in the presence of each other. Currently, it is possible, so long as the testator has signed or acknowledged his or her signature in the presence of both witnesses at the same time, for the witnesses to attest on separate occasions so long as they do so in the presence of the testator. Following on from that, a question arises about whether both witnesses need to witness the same act.
Is it necessary for the testator to sign or acknowledge in the presence of both witnesses at the same time, or could this be done serially? In ordinary circumstances it would appear that there should be no problem in the witnesses signing serially. However, there are certain circumstances where problems could arise. For example, if there is a time-delay between the signing the testator may attempt to alter the provisions of the will before the second witness signs. Such alterations would fall outside the strict attestation requirements.
Confusion could also arise regarding the date of execution. If dates are given with each signature, at what point would the will be deemed to have been executed? There could be some advantage in permitting some form of serial witnessing but acknowledges that serial witnessing may give opportunity for confusion. On the balance it is contended that it is preferable that both witnesses be present
The Author K.P.Satish Kumar M.L. is the leading Probate and Will lawyer. You can get free legal advise on Probate and Will to the team Daniel & Daniel @ 9840802218.
Its like you read my mind! You seem to know so much about this, like you wrote the book in it or something. I think that you can do with a few pics to drive the message home a little bit, but other than that, this is excellent blog. A fantastic read. I will definitely be back. you can try this out
ReplyDeleteWhy do only so much written on this subject? Here you see more. london Property auctions
ReplyDelete