With regards to same sex relationships, the partner had given birth to a child, and during their relationship the non biological mother treated and loved the child as their own.
Unfortunately the relationship between the parents had broken down but, the child continued to see the non biological mother.
When the non biological mother died, she had named the child as her issue, and clearly identifying the child by their name.
The trustees have unfairly mistreated the named child who is now an adult,
The trustees have stated that they are not immediate family, but the deceased has made it clear within the will, classed as their issue..
So what is the legal meaning of issue
Were the partners married or in a civil partnership at the time the child was born or at any point afterwards. Also what does the will say precisely?
The child may not legally be the âissueâ of the non biological mother, but if the non biological mother had made it clear the child was to be treated as her issue then that would take priority over the legal definition. However depending on the terms of the will, the trustees may have discretion over who to benefit so might decide not to benefit the child.
Paul Davies
Clarke Willmott LLP
1 Like
Dear Sonia,
I have attached a screen shot of the page that identifies their issues,
The beneficiary that is treated as their issue is named as, Lindsey whillians
The parents were not registered as married or civil relationship, Lindsey was born in 1983, the parents met and started a relationship in 1980
The relationship ended in 1994.
Lindsey still had that relationship with the both of them afterwards,
Kind regards
Jai
Jai
That definition of âDiscretionary Beneficiariesâ names the individual concerned as a member of the class in their own right - i.e. a beneficiary. Whether they are âissueâ is irrelevant. If anything, naming them separately suggests that the testator did not consider them to be âissueâ (because otherwise why name them separately) but, to reiterate, that is irrelevant here.
It is a different Lindsey listed separately. I think the OP is asking about the person at 5.2.3.2.
1 Like
Laura ford,
You are correct, it is Lindsey Whillians, 5.2.3.2
Issue is defined within the will as including the non bio child and so that definition is the one that is relevant for the interpretation of this will rather than the ânormalâ legal meaning. The definition both recognises that the non bio child would not normally be classed as issue and specifically changes the definition so that in this particular will the non bio child is included within issue and is therefore a member of the class of discretionary beneficiaries.