Just over 8 years since the tragic death of Amy Winehouse on 23 July 2011 her Estate is back in the news as a result of her ex-husband Blake Civil-Fielder allegedly pursuing a claim for a significant lump sum and monthly allowance for his needs.
Amy is understood to have died without leaving a Will (intestate) meaning her net Estate of around £3 million passed to her parents Janis and Mitch under the Intestacy Rules. Since her death, the Amy Winehouse Estate is understood to have swelled considerably as a result of ongoing royalties received from her songs with her parents setting up the Amy Winehouse Foundation to help young musicians and people suffering from addiction.
Despite Blake reported to have received a divorce pay-out of some £250,000 in July 2009 he now appears to be claiming that this didn’t amount to a clean break and so he is entitled to bring a belated claim against Amy Winehouse’s Estate.
It is anticipated that Blake’s claim is being forwarded against the Estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family & Dependants) Act 1975 (“the 1975 Act”) as a former spouse of Amy. It is open to Blake to bring such a claim so long as he has not remarried.
If this is the case then two issues will need to be considered:-
- Whether the divorce settlement provided for a “clean break” in which case the Court would not permit Blake to bring a claim against Amy’s Estate. It is understood Blake’s legal team will be arguing that the wording of the settlement did not amount to a clean break; and
- Even if there was no clean break Blake will need to convince the Court that he should be permitted to bring his claim out of time under the 1975 Act. Ordinarily a claim can only be brought under the 1975 Act within 6 months of the date of the Grant of Representation. Online probate records suggest that Amy’s Grant of Representation was issued on 23 March 2012 which would make Blake’s claim out of time.
There have been conflicting cases recently where the Courts have adopted differing positions on claimants bringing 1975 Act claims out of time. One claimant was refused permission some 17 months late, despite a standstill agreement being in place, and another was granted permission some 25 years out of time. The most recent decision refused to grant permission despite being only 2 months out of time because a claim lay against the claimant’s solicitors for professional negligence. The current legal position on bringing claims out of time is far from being straight forward.
If Blake is granted permission to bring his claim out of time and the Court finds that a clean break was not achieved upon their divorce then the Court will weigh a number of factors in the balance including Blake’s financial and housing needs as against the size of the Estate and the current beneficiaries’ need for provision from the Estate.
There are likely to be a number of hurdles which Blake will need to overcome to succeed in his claim and therefore we must wait to see whether he can overcome them.