The Law Commission's recent report on 'Modernising Wills' (published 16 May 2025) proposes, among other things, the abolition of the rule that a person's Will is automatically revoked if they subsequently marry or form a civil partnership. Whilst a long way from becoming law, the proposal is a welcome prospective safeguard against the rise of predatory marriage in the UK.
Under s18 and s18B Wills Act 1837, marrying or forming a civil partnership automatically revokes a person's existing Will, unless the Will includes express wording which states that it is entered into in anticipation of marriage to a particular person. Accordingly, if a person makes a Will leaving everything to (say) their children, and then later marries, that Will will be automatically revoked. Unless the testator makes a new Will after the marriage, the intestacy provisions will apply on their death, as if they had never made a Will at all. Marriage is the only change in a person's circumstances which has this effect: divorce, for example, does not revoke a Will, although the former spouse will be treated as having predeceased the testator from the date of dissolution. The birth of a child also has no automatic effect on a person's Will.
The provision, which was designed to ensure that a testator's change in personal circumstances is reflected in the way their estate is distributed after their death, arguably acts as a protective measure for spouses and civil partners, ensuring that they are provided for in the event that a testator forgets to update their Will after marriage. As the Law Commission's report highlights, however, there are several arguments in favour of abolition. Firstly, the provision is arguably contradictory to testamentary freedom: a testator who seeks to exercise that freedom, but later marries, will find their wishes automatically replaced by the statutory rules of intestacy. For those marrying for a second time or later in life, it is perhaps outdated to assume that the testator would want their spouse to be the primary beneficiary of their estate, rather than, for example, adult children from a different relationship. Secondly, as the Law Commission highlights, there is a lack of public awareness around the provision, which can lead to disappointing outcomes – and disputes – for expectant beneficiaries.
In recent years, a further argument has arisen in favour of reform: the rise in predatory marriage. Predatory marriage (or civil partnership) occurs where an elderly or otherwise vulnerable person is manipulated or coerced into marriage with a third party for that party's financial gain. Thanks to s18/18B Wills Act 1837, a predatory marriage automatically revokes any Will which the victim might previously have had in place. If the victim does not have capacity to create a new Will, or is unaware of the need to do so, then the intestacy rules will apply on their death, meaning that the predatory spouse would stand to inherit a statutory legacy of £322,000, all of the deceased's personal possessions (chattels), and half of anything remaining. The predatory spouse will also have the authority to decide on burial or cremation arrangements for the deceased, which can be particularly hurtful for family members.
Predatory marriage can occur where the person in question does not have the requisite mental capacity to marry. In such circumstances, the marriage is voidable and can be ended by annulment, but the Will is still irrevocably revoked from the date of marriage. Because the capacity threshold for marriage is 'lower' than it is to create a Will, moreover, predatory marriage can also occur where a person does have capacity to marry, but does not have capacity to create a new Will. In these circumstances, unless a statutory Will is made, the marriage will not be voidable and the person will be unable to create a valid Will to rectify the inheritance position on their death. Predatory marriage often takes place without the knowledge of the victim's family, making it difficult or impossible for statutory Wills or other forms of protection to be put in place.
Abolishing the automatic revocation provision will not prevent predatory marriage altogether, and it may not prevent other forms of financial abuse from being carried out during the victim's lifetime. It will not protect those who do not have existing Wills, as a predatory spouse will still be the primary beneficiary under the intestacy rules. However, should the recommendation become law, it will remove a significant financial incentive for those looking to target vulnerable people in this way, as there will no longer be an automatic entitlement to the estates of those with pre-existing Wills. Surely, therefore, this change is to be welcomed.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
