Who inherited Mary Helena Irvine's estate?

[sandgrown]

My ancestor, Mary Helena Irvine of St. Annes-on-the-Sea, Lancashire, wrote her will on 15 July 1940. Therein she left her entire estate to her only daughter, Ruth, aged six in 1940. She appointed her husband, David Alexander Irvine, her executor and trustee. In July 1941, both Mary Helena, aged 34, and Ruth, aged 7, died from gas poisoning at their home, where they were found by David Alexander Irvine. Ruth was already dead; Mary Helena died several days later in hospital. Mary Helena was survived by two brothers, Richard Sydney Whiteside, aged 42, and Herbert William Whiteside, aged 39.
Who inherited Mary Helena's estate?

[arthurk]

My non-expert feeling is that since Ruth was a minor, the estate would almost certainly have been held in trust for her, and as she would not have been thought capable of writing a will at age 6 (even if permitted - I'm not sure about that), there should have been a clause stipulating what should happen if Ruth died before she inherited absolutely. So it's impossible to give a definite answer without knowing what was in the will.

If there was no such clause, then I think under the intestacy rules it would have been Mary Helena's husband/widower: Ruth would have been intestate and her father, as sole surviving parent, would have been her next of kin.

I'm not an expert, though, so will happily defer to anyone who is.

Arthur

[Megan Roberts]

I agree with Arthur that the estate would have gone to the deceased's husband, but not through the daughter Ruth.

Ruth died before her mother, and therefore in my view the bequest "failed", and the estate of Mary Helena would have been distributed in accordance with the rules of intestacy, as there would in effect have been no valid will.

[arthurk]

I agree with Arthur that the estate would have gone to the deceased's husband, but not through the daughter Ruth.

Ruth died before her mother, and therefore in my view the bequest "failed", and the estate of Mary Helena would have been distributed in accordance with the rules of intestacy, as there would in effect have been no valid will.

Oops, I misread the question and thought it was Ruth that had lived a few days, not her mother. Now I've got that straight, my answer would be the same as Megan's - except that I would add that this would only apply if the will didn't have anything to stipulate what should happen if Ruth predeceased Mary Helena. Intestacy wouldn't apply if there were any alternatives that were capable of being carried out.

Arthur

[geneius]

Agree athurk, the clause in the will has failed due to the premature demise of the beneficiary, if there are other legatees iin the will it is distributed in the same proportion as their entitlement.

Otherwise dealt with under the rules of intestacy,

Official guidance

https://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/ihtmanual/IHTM12111.htm

[sandgrown]

Thanks for confirming what I suspected: the husband / widower inherited his wife's estate because the death of their daughter created an intestacy. Thanks. Sandgrown