The Court of Appeal has ruled in a bitter inheritance dispute over a Cumbrian country estate.
Arden LJ dismissed business consultant Philip Howard’s appeal against a high court ruling in favour of his father, Sir John Howard-Lawson, in a key preliminary issue in the dispute over an “eccentric” name and arms clause in his great-great-grandfather’s will.
The judge backed the high court ruling, in which Proudman J described it as a “very sad case”.
Howard launched proceedings seeking to recover what he claimed was his rightful inheritance, alleging that his father had forfeited his interest in the Corby Estate – which includes Corby Castle – in January 1962 because he failed to comply with the clause in the 1930 will, which made “enjoyment” of the Cumbrian estate conditional on the adoption of the Howard surname and arms.
Howard claimed that his father had hidden this forfeiture from him until recently, and that if it had not been concealed from him, he would have avoided bankruptcy in 1993.
However, Mr Howard-Lawson denied any forfeiture, and claimed that his son had obtained a large part of the Corby Estate in a disentail, but had mismanaged it to such an extent that the estate, which had been in the family since the 17th century, had to be sold.
The forfeiture point was tried as a preliminary issue, and the high court judge ruled that there was no forfeiture of the “complex and tortuous” clause.
Backing that decision, Arden LJ said that Mr Howard-Lawson had complied with the “eccentric” clause by applying for a Royal Licence to bear the Howard surname and coat of arms within one year after Mr Howard’s great-great-grandfather, who was also called Philip, died in 1934.
Even though this was not obtained until shortly after one year had passed, she upheld the high court ruling that Mr Howard-Lawson’s reasonable endeavours to obtain the Royal Licence had been enough.
Proudman J said in her judgment that the clause was inserted because the deceased had only one daughter, who married a man named Lawson, and he was concerned to ensure the continuance of the association of his family name and arms with the estate.
Howard v Howard-Lawson Court of Appeal (Arden, Black, Kitchin LJJ) 18 January 2012
Christopher Pymont QC and James Aldridge (instructed by Girlings Solicitors) for the claimant
Robert Pearce QC and Stephen Boyd for the respondent
