Dinsdale v Fowell: The role of bigamy in the intestacy rules and the 1975 Act

Millie Cross, Trainee Solicitor in our Private Wealth Disputes team, looks at a recent High Court case which has considered the eligibility for a second wife to claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (“the 1975 Act”).

Background

James Dinsdale (the Deceased) died intestate (without a will) in 2020. As well as an estate worth £1.8 million, the Deceased left behind a legal wife, a second partner whom he had bigamously married and an adult child.

The Deceased had married his legal wife, Dr Victoria Fowell, in Las Vegas in 2012. He then married his second partner, Margaret Dinsdale, in Las Vegas in 2017. Crucially, the Deceased did not divorce Victoria before his marriage to Margaret.

The law on bigamy

Bigamy is described as the process of marrying someone whilst already being legally married to another person. In England and Wales, bigamy is a criminal offence as contained within Section 57 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861.

Many aspects of family law have been influenced by the criminalisation of bigamy, namely the fact that a second marriage is considered void if a legal marriage exists with another individual. This is contained within Section 11 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Relating this to the case in question, the Deceased’s second marriage to Margaret is consequently considered void in law. In theory, this has an impact on Margaret’s ability to claim right to the Deceased’s estate under the intestacy rules, as well as her ability to make a claim under the Inheritance Act 1975 Act.

The intestacy rules

The intestacy rules govern the distribution of a person’s estate when an individual dies without a valid will, which happened in this case. For deaths occurring on or after 26 July 2023, where the deceased left a spouse/civil partner and a child or children of their own, the net estate (i.e. the estate after payment of funeral and administration expenses, tax and other liabilities), will be divided as follows:

• The surviving spouse/civil partner will receive the deceased’s personal effects, known as their ‘personal chattels’.
• The statutory legacy of the first £322,000 (plus interest from the date of death) passes to the deceased’s surviving spouse / civil partner. If the net estate is less than £322,000 plus interest, it will pass entirely to the surviving spouse / civil partner.
• The remainder of the net estate (if any) will be divided:
  • 50% to the surviving spouse/civil partner
  • 50% will be divided equally among the deceased’s children (by blood or legal adoption).

Where the deceased has no children, their surviving spouse/civil partner will inherit the entire net estate.

Under these rules, Margaret (the Deceased’s second wife) does not have an automatic right to inherit the Deceased’s estate as cohabiting partners are not protected under the intestacy rules unless such provision is included within a will. Instead, the statutory legacy would pass to the surviving spouse (being his only legal wife, Victoria) and the remainder of the net estate (if any) would be split between Victoria and the Deceased’s adult child.

More information about the intestacy provisions can be seen in our intestacy rules flow chart.

Claims under the 1975 Act

The purpose of the 1975 Act is to make “reasonable financial provision” for a person in circumstances where either a will, or where there is no will, the intestacy rules, fail to do so. It is important to note that only specified classes of people are able to make such claims. Although eligibility does spread wider, the most common class of people are spouses, civil partners or children of the deceased.

Given that the bigamous aspect of the Deceased’s relationship with Margaret rendered their marriage void, it would be assumed that Margaret could not make a claim under the 1975 as a “spouse”.

The decision of the case

A full hearing will be held to determine whether Margaret should be entitled to receive a reasonable financial provision, however the important point to note is that the judge ruled at a preliminary hearing that Margaret should in fact be treated as a “spouse” for the purposes of the 1975 Act, on the basis that she had been the Deceased’s partner for many years and cared for him during his illness.

Margaret was also awarded an interim payment of £50,000 at this stage.

Lessons to be learnt

This case highlights the importance of making a valid will and seeking advice from a qualified professional in this area. Wills should also be reviewed throughout the course of one’s life. This is crucial for all individuals, however particularly in a world with increasingly blended families; for example, those who have subsequent partners and/or marriages following a previous marriage that has not been legally voided (divorce). Wills should be drafted to reflect an individual’s wishes upon their death and are useful in preventing the potentially unwanted distribution of an estate in line with the rigid intestacy rules.

It is also a useful reminder that if someone is financially dependant upon you, they may have a claim under the 1975 Act, even if there is not a legal marriage in place.