# Succession Act 1965



## divadsnilloc (7 May 2008)

A very unsavory situation has developed since my mother's death last year vis a vis the family home. 

It appears to me that the best and most economical way to deal with this problem is to lodge a claim under the 1965 Succession Act whereby one can claim that you have not been adequately provided for by your parents will. 

Has anybody any experience of this scenario and could anybody recommend a solicitor who has expertise in this type of issue?


----------



## dazza21ie (7 May 2008)

What you are referring to is an application under Section 117 of the Succession Act. 

I have never heard anyone say before that a Section 117 application is the most economical way to solving anything! 

This involves a High Court case against the estate of the deceased. It can be lengthy and very expensive and will not help family relations in any way. 

Unfortunately in some circumstances it is the only option available. 

Maybe if you give more details a more straight forward path might be suggested.


----------



## ajapale (7 May 2008)

dazza21ie said:


> Maybe if you give more details a more straight forward path might be suggested.



Im not sure that it is wise to discuss such details on an anonymous discussion board lsuch as AAM.

From the details given it may be possible to identify the individuals involved.

If it ever goes to court I imagine that having details publically posted like this will not help.

I suggest you contact your solicitor.

I have removed diva's  second very detailed post.

aj

mod


----------



## Pulped (7 May 2008)

A s117 application is often difficult to succeeded in as it turns on whether the parents failed in their moral duty to provide for you. There are a whole host of considerations that will be taken into account by the court and it is by no means an automatic right and it could end up costing the estate a fortune. You'd be best to get on to your solicitor.


----------



## bazza33 (8 May 2008)

Also, it only applies if ur mother left a will (doesn't apply to intestacy) and MUST be made WITHIN 6 months of the grant of probate


----------



## Starguard (12 Aug 2009)

Hi, dont know if anyone can help me. I am about to get embroiled in s117 Succession Act case and also under the doctrine of advancement. I understand it all so am considering all my options. 

My query is this though - does anyone know where someone stands if the person on their birth certificate is not the natural mother.   NO adoption took place. Just private arrangement within family to keep secrets.  Would the child have lost "inheritance rights" from the natural birth mother or if DNA proves parentage does the birth certificate with wrong names on get ignored? For sure no adoption took place.

Any guidance would be useful.


----------



## j26 (12 Aug 2009)

Starguard said:


> Hi, dont know if anyone can help me. I am about to get embroiled in s117 Succession Act case and also under the doctrine of advancement. I understand it all so am considering all my options.
> 
> My query is this though - does anyone know where someone stands if the person on their birth certificate is not the natural mother.   NO adoption took place. Just private arrangement within family to keep secrets.  Would the child have lost "inheritance rights" from the natural birth mother or if DNA proves parentage does the birth certificate with wrong names on get ignored? For sure no adoption took place.
> 
> Any guidance would be useful.



If there were no formal adoption, the nexus between mother and child was never broken, so I'd say* the child could claim from the natural mother.  As regards the birth cert, to overcome that, a declaration of parentage under Section 5 of the Status of Children Act, 1987 would probably be required (it may involve a blood/dna test, but not necessarily if there are other people who can corroborate - there was a case where the father had passed away and it was done this way)

* I'm not aware of any cases on this point, so I could be well and truly wrong


----------



## Starguard (12 Aug 2009)

Thank you for this. That was what I thought.  Under the Succession Act 1965 the child was in loco parentis so is deemed (s62 (10)) a child of the family so can inherit in any event under the will of her "parents".   DNA showed 13 out of the 15 markers matched, the other two were mutated.  The "birth mother" is still alive but is not in a position to "come out" as it were although she is the only one who can say anything about the childs birth - time of birth, godparents, etc.  She has all but said she is the mother and she used to send the child gifts regularly thoughout her lifetime, including money for her upkeep to her relatives who took the child in.

Hopefully it will resolve but glad to know you agree. Irish and their secrets!!!


----------

