There is a com­mon mis­con­cep­tion that a will is such a pow­er­ful doc­u­ment that noth­ing and no one can re­verse and/or ques­tion the last wish­es as laid out. This mis­con­cep­tion has led to nu­mer­ous le­gal bat­tles, an­i­mos­i­ty among fam­i­ly and ac­tu­al phys­i­cal blows.

Peo­ple be­lieve that there is a pow­er that comes with a will that al­lows them to laud over rel­a­tives who are not named as ben­e­fi­cia­ries. This is not so. A will can be ques­tioned, can be con­test­ed, can be set aside and cer­tain gifts can be re­versed or deemed void.

With­in the last week, I have not­ed two court de­ci­sions re­port­ed in our news­pa­pers. One stemmed from the Court of Ap­peal and the oth­er from the High Court. Both mat­ters car­ried the same sub­ject line: wills. The wills in ques­tion were chal­lenged due to var­i­ous con­cerns. Over time, I have writ­ten about the dif­fer­ence be­tween doc­u­ments be­ing pre­pared by an at­tor­ney ver­sus a Com­mis­sion­er of Af­fi­davit or a Jus­tice of the Peace. This has al­ways been a mat­ter of con­cern, as I am well aware that a will can be suc­cess­ful­ly chal­lenged if es­sen­tial steps are not con­sid­ered and fol­lowed.