| White v Driver | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Prerogative Court of Canterbury |
| Full case name | White and Twist v Driver and Driver, concerning the deceased Elizabeth Manning |
| Decided | 3 July 1809 |
| Citation(s) | Reports of Cases argued in the Ecclesiastical Courts |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Sir John Nicholl |
| Case opinions | |
| The will of an insane person is valid if the will is made in a period of lucidity, but the burden of proof lies in establishing the lucidity of the testator when making the will | |
White v Driver was a case decided in 1809 concerning a challenge to a will on the grounds of insanity. It laid down that if there was a previous history of insanity, the burden of proof lies in proving the sanity of the testator when making the will. The case was decided at Doctor's Commons under civil law, but continues to be quoted in the UK, Australia[1] and in the US as recently as 2010.[2]
- ^ State Reports, South Australia. Law Book Co. of Australasia. 1943.
- ^ Donnelly, Mary (2010). Healthcare Decision-Making and the Law. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-11831-6.
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search