If llamas and alpacas had to battle with donkeys and bears, which group would come out on top? In a recent High Court case which concerned the inheritance of £1.9 million under a deceased animal enthusiast’s Will, the donkeys and bears have triumphed.
Candia Midworth (the “Testatrix”) died in 2022. By her Will dated 29 September 1994 (the “Will”), the Testatrix left the residue of her estate to be divided equally amongst certain beneficiaries, which included British Camelids Limited (the charitable arm of the British Llama and Alpaca Association), the Brooke Hospital for Animals, the Zoo Check Project, the Libearty Campaign, the Burstow Wildlife Sanctuary and the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection. The Will stated that the residue was “for such of the following [entities] that exist at the date of my death”. The status of each of the entities at the Deceased’s death was as follows:
- British Camelids Limited and the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection both exist in the same form as stated in the Will;
- the Brooke Hospital for Animals, which supports working horses, mules and donkeys, is now incorporated and carries out the same charitable purposes albeit under a different charity number and address;
- the Zoo Check Project, which aimed to challenge the zoo industry, is now part of the Born Free Foundation;
- World Animal Protection continues the work of the Libearty Campaign, which aimed to protect bears internationally; and
- the Burstow Wildlife Sanctuary has ceased to exist.
British Camelids Limited claimed that the gifts to the entities that no longer exist in the same form or at all should fail, and that the residue should be divided between it and the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection. The High Court therefore had to determine whether the residuary gifts were conditional on the continued legal existence of the entities at the date of the Testatrix’s death.
The High Court held that the gifts could be construed as gifts for the entities’ charitable purposes if those purposes continue, even though the entity may not exist in the same form. Therefore, each of the above charitable entities, other than the Burstow Wildlife Sanctuary, will receive a one-sixth share of the residuary estate.
The Burstow Wildlife Sanctuary’s share of the residuary estate will likely be divided amongst some of the above charities with similar purposes, although the court will decide on this at a later date.
Please contact Catherine Pugsley or Hannah Fingleton in our Private Client Team on 020 7222 5381 to discuss charitable giving or general estate planning. We cannot guarantee that either of them are experts in camelid or ursine care.
