Some years ago, when I first worked for a law firm, it became clear from fellow practitioners that they perceived that charities named in Wills were quite robust in securing what was set out therein when the estate came to be administered. I quickly found that this perception was accurate! The following recent case (September 2025) perhaps underlines that perception.
Ms Midworth drafted her will in 1994. She died in April 2022. In her will, she left her estate to a number of animal charities which included British Camelids Limited, the Brooke, the Born Free Foundation and the World Society for the Protection of Animals (now World Animal Protection).
However, two of the charities subsequently became incorporated. The Brooke, World Society for Protection of Animals and the Born Free Foundation were all unincorporated in 1994. Like many charities, they later restructured into incorporated charities.
British Camelids Limited, issued proceedings and argued that the legacy should pass only to British Camelids Limited and Cruelty Free International due to those restructurings.
However, the court rejected the argument and held that the successor charities were entitled to the shares left to their predecessor charities. This would seem to accurately reflect the testators’ original intentions.
See the case report at:
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2025/2255.html
Stephen Parnham
