Inheritance law before 1965 sucession act

Haulage21

Does anyone know factually what the law was in Ireland when someone died without a will, before the succession act of 1965? Cannot seem to find any concrete information on this. Thank you

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058252253/inheritance-law-before-1965-sucession-act

Just right before it? I don't think there was much change as regard intestacy. All property devolved to the administrator. Prior to 1959 Administration of Estates Act unregistered real property of an intestate passed by the old rules of descent subject to rights of remaining spouse etc. Registered land devolved to the administrator.

1 Jan 1967 is the relevant date

Older rules same as this:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4/3-4/106/contents

Modified by Section 19 of:

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1859/act/35/enacted/en/print.html

Haulage21

Thank you. This issue relates to a registered farm and the year in question was 1960. Would the surviving family members have any rights in this instance?

Donald Trump

Oh, don't take what I wrote as any kind of "advice". It is only some basic stuff and I put it there in the hope that it might twig something in someone who is actually qualified in that area!

I think that a person would need more information from you as regards who would have rights. If someone else took possession of the property since 1960 then you'd likely be out of luck as regards adverse possession.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058252253/inheritance-law-before-1965-sucession-act

Before 1967 realty descended to the heir at law. It depends on who was the heir at law in 1960 as to whether family members have any rights.

coylemj

OP, I think it might help people if you stated what next of kin were alive when that landowner died - widow, children, siblings, nieces & nephews?

But, as poster Donald Trump has pointed out above, it's almost certainly too late to do anything now. If someone took possession of the land back in 1960, it will be a major challenge for anyone else to try to assert their rights of succession after over 60 years. That would probably be the case even if the person died after the enactment of the Succession Act 1965.

KidShelleen

Hi Claw Hammer.

The word factually here is daunting, I imagine it's a question about something to do with a particular law.

To answer your post as best I can the date of the Succession Act 1965 was not a black and white changeover year. Much depended on the solicitor/lawyer managing the case for this discussion we assume here if everything had to be ready for processing in 1960, that year the old rules likely would have applied.

However, if everything was not prepared until say 1963 or later the argument would be shifting towards adopting prematurely the 1965 act on the basis that the act is a certainty to be written into law.

It seems at that time the 'buffer' zone was left to the discretion of the solicitor/lawyer party presenting the case, in that way they protect their own interests by prematurely applying the new, Succession Act 1965 law and probably the majority of judges would have given their support.

As feedback, I would be interested to know your thoughts?

Regards,

KS

Claw Hammer

"The word factually here is daunting, I imagine it's a question about something to do with a particular law."

Thios is gibberish. What does it mean?

John_100

no question can be answered without full details of the facts..every issue is different and requires a thorough investigation..

when a non criminal issue comes before the courts..it will come under common law legislation..or equitable law rules..the equitable rules are discretionary..but in reality..are just "as good" as common law rules if you can produce evidence to support the facts..

of course..it is not that easy to put all the information together in order to decide on the best course of action..if any.. which is why solicitors and barristers make good money from the misfortunes of others..

of course..there is nothing stopping anyone from seeking legal resolution to any issue in the courts..as a lay litigant..but as mentioned this requires a lot of hard work and.. unfortunately..experience..which of course is the hard bit!!

coylemj

when a non criminal issue comes before the courts..it will come under common law legislation..or equitable law rules..the equitable rules are discretionary..but in reality..are just "as good" as common law rules if you can produce evidence to support the facts..

Based on the above and the total garbage in post #7, this thread needs to be closed ASAP.