Which bequests take priority - named assets or named amounts?

[RichieRuin]

My father died a couple of months ago. I am his executor. He left his house to me and specified amounts of money to each of my siblings. However, in the 10+ years since he made the will, the house has doubled in value while his savings have halved. I am wondering what is the legal situation regarding which bequests take priority, i.e. does the house have to be sold in order to honour the specific bequests, or do I get to keep the house and my siblings each get half of what they were promised?

 

[Brendan Burgess]

I am a big fan of being an Executor without using a solicitor but only in straightforward cases.

You should consult a solicitor who would have all the information on which to advise you including seeing the entire will.

You can continue acting as Executor of course.

 

[Zobeda]

The manner in which the will is worded is likely the big issue in this case.
I would agree with Brendan absolutely. Professional advice should be sought.

 

[TomEdison]

Yes, take professional advice.

In general, bequests of specific assets — usually land — take precedence over bequests of a stated value, which in turn are paid out before residual bequests.

So, the will says "I leave my farm blackacre to my son A, the sum of €250,000 to my son B and the rest of my estate to my son C". The estate consists of Blackacre; farm machinery and livestock with a value of €50,000 and investments with a value of €100,000. A gets Blackacre; B gets €150,000, which includes the sale proceeds of the stock and machinery (or he can get the stock and machinery itself), and C gets nothing.

 

[RichieRuin]

Thanks for the replies. I have already engaged a solicitor to deal with the estate (never occurred to me to do otherwise) and I will of course be asking them about this. I just wanted to get other people's input.

FWIW, the wording is - "I give devise and bequeath the sum of €x to A for their own use and benefit, I give devise and bequeath the sum of €y to B for their own use and benefit", etc. and then "I give devise and bequeath my dwelling house to C for their own use and benefit". It doesn't say anything about prioritising one thing over another and there are no if/then conditions.