Daughters of Forest Recluse Win £1m Inheritance Battle Against 'Domineering' Aunt
Four daughters have emerged victorious from a bitter High Court battle over their father's £1 million estate, after a judge ruled he was suffering from 'insane delusions' when he drew up a will that largely disinherited them in favour of their aunt.
Eccentric Life in the Forest of Dean
Michael Gwilliam, who passed away aged 79 in February 2022, spent almost his entire life in Gloucestershire's 'rural, ancient and somewhat secluded' Forest of Dean. Described in court as 'a true son of the Forest of Dean', he was a farmer and antiques dealer known for his passion for restoring classic cars, often seen in his overalls and wellies.
For most of his life, Mr Gwilliam enjoyed a close and loving relationship with his four daughters: Helen Ginger, Georgina Charles, Emily Gwilliam and Caroline Gwilliam. He had consistently declined to make a will, believing his daughters would automatically inherit his substantial estate under intestacy rules.
Mental Health Deterioration and Controversial Will
The family harmony began to unravel in 2013 when Mr Gwilliam, then aged 71, experienced a rapid deterioration in his mental health. He developed irrational suspicions about neighbours and even his own children, believing he was 'under siege' in his rural home at New House Farm in the village of Awre.
In 2014, against his lifelong aversion to will-making, Mr Gwilliam executed a document that shocked his daughters. The will left them just 25 per cent of his estate between them, while his sister Sheila Gwilliam, an 81-year-old vintage clothing shop owner described as 'domineering', received 25 per cent. The remainder was distributed among other relatives including Sheila's son Robert Mickleburgh and Mr Gwilliam's former partner Joan Brooks.
Attached to the will was a devastating 'letter of wishes' in which Mr Gwilliam accused his daughters of plotting to have him sectioned and stealing antiques from his home - claims the judge would later determine were baseless delusions.
High Court Battle and Judicial Findings
After their father's death, the four sisters launched legal proceedings at the High Court in Bristol, seeking to have the 2014 will overturned. They argued their father lacked testamentary capacity and that their aunt Sheila along with Joan Brooks had unduly influenced him to disinherit them.
Following a detailed hearing, Judge Leslie Blohm KC delivered a landmark ruling in the daughters' favour. The judge found that Mr Gwilliam was suffering from 'an insane delusion' probably caused by a stroke when the will was created.
'Michael's medical records indicate that he had suffered some defect in his brain, likely a stroke,' said Judge Blohm. 'In the absence of a defect of the brain, it is difficult to explain such a complete volte-face towards his children. The cause of these delusions was late onset schizophrenia caused by organic disorder of the brain.'
Undue Influence and Family Conflict
The court heard compelling evidence about the deterioration of Mr Gwilliam's mental state in the period leading up to the will's creation. Witnesses described him as having grown 'shaking, frightened and timid', complaining about harassment from a dead neighbour, vandalism to his cars, and believing he was under siege at home.
Judge Blohm found that both Sheila Gwilliam and Joan Brooks had made a series of derogatory statements to Mr Gwilliam about his daughters, 'intending to induce Michael to make a will that was less favourable to his daughters'. Both women were present when solicitors drafted the will, with the judge noting that 'although I consider it likely that Sheila was the prime mover in causing Michael to make his will, it is evident that Joan was an associate in this regard'.
The judge highlighted specific instances where Joan Brooks had told Mr Gwilliam that his daughter Helen, a senior nurse, was 'evil' and that the daughters wanted to sell his farm 'for their own gain'.
Funeral Exclusion and Legal Arguments
The family conflict reached such intensity that when Mr Gwilliam died, Sheila barred the daughters from attending their father's funeral in Bath. The sisters instead held a separate memorial service for him locally.
During the legal proceedings, the sisters alleged a case of 'fraudulent calumny' against their aunt, focusing on knowingly false statements made by her. These included claims that they had stolen items from their father's home while he was sectioned, that there was a plot against him to have him sectioned, and that Helen had orchestrated his detention.
While Judge Blohm rejected the fraudulent calumny claim on the basis that both women genuinely believed their statements at the time, he was unequivocal in his assessment of their influence: 'I have no doubt that Joan and in particular Sheila considered that the claimants did not deserve to inherit, and that part of the purpose of their making of these statements to Michael was to induce him to deal with his assets in a manner that prevented his children from benefiting from them.'
Verdict and Inheritance Outcome
In his comprehensive ruling, Judge Blohm determined that Mr Gwilliam's daughters had acted in their father's best interests throughout his mental health crisis. 'Michael's daughters were acting in what they perceived to be Michael's best interests,' he stated. 'That is the opposite of being evil, mercenary or bad news.'
The judge concluded that 'had Michael not been suffering from such insane delusions, he would have made no will at all', both because he wished to benefit all his daughters equally and because he disliked the idea of making a will.
The ruling that Mr Gwilliam died intestate - without a valid will - means his four daughters as next of kin will inherit his entire estate, which lawyers have estimated could be worth up to £1 million. The judgment serves as a significant precedent in cases involving testamentary capacity and undue influence in will-making, particularly where mental health issues are involved.
