The High Court has ruled that an attempted alteration to a Will after its execution was invalid, confirming that the deceased’s original bequest of a valuable Dublin property stood.
The case concerned Michael Joseph McNally, who died leaving four siblings, having never married and with no children. His Will, dated the 29th of April 1981, originally left a valuable property in Dublin to one of his brothers, Eamonn McNally. A later addition to the Will attempted to replace the bequest of the property with a nominal sum of IR €1 (pound), raising questions over the validity of the alteration.
Another brother, Malachy McNally, sought a grant of probate and an order declaring that the Will was duly executed. The High Court examined whether the attempted change was valid and, if it were, how it would affect the inheritance of the remaining siblings and the children of a predeceased sibling.
The judge confirmed that the Will had been correctly executed and then addressed the attempted alteration. Under section 86 of the Succession Act 1965, any obliterations or interlineations made after execution are invalid unless executed in the same manner as the Will itself. The court highlighted the difficulty such alterations can cause, noting:
“A conundrum can arise if there is an invalid obliteration of part of a Will and it is nit possible, even with the aid of technology, to decipher what the terms of the Will are”
In this case, the judge found that the obliterated words in Mr McNally’s Will were still legible, and there was no evidence to suggest an intention to revoke the original bequest in favour of Eamonn. Any changes made prior to execution would have been valid, but there was no indication of this.
Evidence showed that the Will had been in the possession of a brother, Tom McNally, prior to August 2009, and later came into the applicant’s possession on the 12th of August 2009. The judge noted a 28-year gap during which an alteration could theoretically have been made, but concluded that it was more likely any attempted changes occurred after execution. There was no acknowledgment or witness evidence to support the changes, meaning section 86 had not been complied with.
As a result, the High Court ruled that the attempted changes were invalid. The Will was admitted to probate including the words “160 S.C. Road, Dublin” while the inserted characters “£1-00” were excluded as their insertion was not properly executed.
This decision reinforces the importance of executing Wills correctly and ensuring that any alterations are carried out formally. Attempted changes after execution that do not comply with statutory requirements are legally ineffective, and original bequests will generally prevail.
In the matter of the Estate of Michael Joseph McNally [2025] IEHC 299.
If you have any questions our specialized Probate team is here to help.
You can contact McCormack Solicitors on
Email: info@carolmccormacksolicitors.ie
Phone: 071 9621846
www.carolmccormacksolicitors.ie
Disclaimer:
The contents of these pages are provided as an information guide only. While every effort is made in preparing material for publication no responsibility is accepted by or on behalf of McCormack Solicitors for any errors, omissions or misleading statements on these pages or any site to which these pages connect.