Taking will instructions from a relative: acting only on the client's own instructions (SRA Code para 3.1)
Ravi Mehta telephones Elm Street Solicitors and asks Laura Bennett, a solicitor, to prepare a new will for his mother, Kamala, aged 88. Ravi says Kamala wants to leave her whole estate to him instead of dividing it equally between him and his sister, as her existing will does. Ravi will bring Kamala in to sign, pay the firm's fees and has emailed a typed list of 'Mum's wishes'. Laura has never spoken to Kamala, and Ravi says Kamala is too tired to come to the phone.
Which of the following best describes how Laura should proceed under the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors?
Choose one answer to see the reasoning.
Worked answer
Correct answer A: She should not act on Ravi's instructions alone, and should see Kamala to satisfy herself that they reflect Kamala's own wishes.
THE RULE TO REMEMBER
Act only on instructions from the client or someone properly authorised by them; if you suspect instructions do not reflect the client's wishes, do not act until you are satisfied that they do (SRA Code para 3.1).
Taking will instructions from a relative: acting only on the client's own instructions (SRA Code para 3.1)
Paragraph 3.1 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors requires a solicitor to act for clients only on instructions from the client, or from someone properly authorised to provide instructions on their behalf. If the solicitor has reason to suspect that the instructions do not represent the client's wishes, the solicitor must not act unless satisfied that they do. Kamala is the client. The instructions come from the person who would benefit from the change, Laura has never spoken to Kamala and there is no suggestion that Ravi is authorised to give instructions for her. Laura has reason to suspect the instructions may not be Kamala's, so she should see Kamala, ideally alone, and confirm her instructions before acting.
Why B is wrong: Being a relative who pays the fees does not make Ravi the client or authorise him to instruct, and he stands to benefit.
Why C is wrong: Proper execution concerns the will's formal validity, not whether Laura may act on these instructions.
Why D is wrong: Para 3.1 permits instructions from someone properly authorised, and Laura may act once satisfied they are Kamala's.
Why E is wrong: An assurance from the person who benefits cannot satisfy Laura that the instructions are Kamala's.
That's today's practice done. Another featured question tomorrow.
Related questions
Selling a house on the instructions of the owner's attorney under a registered LPA (Code 3.1)
Which of the following best describes whether the firm may act on the sale?
Client wants to leave a significant gift to the solicitor drafting the will (Code 6.1)
How should Clara proceed?
Solicitor drafting a parent's will that leaves residue equally to the solicitor and siblings
Which of the following best describes whether Jonah may draft the will without his mother first taking independent legal advice?
A GOOD HABIT, DELIVERED
Tomorrow's question.
In your inbox.
One free question a day, with the answer and reasoning.
No course pitches. Just your daily practice.