- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Presence
In the law relating to wills, the term presence refers to an important legal requirement governing the valid execution of a will under the Wills Act 1837. Section 9 of the Act requires several acts connected with signing and witnessing a will to occur in the “presence” of the relevant parties. Where another person signs the will on behalf of the testator, that person must do so in the testator’s presence and at the testator’s direction. The testator must also sign or acknowledge the signature in the presence of at least two witnesses, and those witnesses must themselves sign or acknowledge their signatures in the presence of the testator. Additionally, the witnesses must be present together when witnessing the execution. These formalities exist to reduce fraud, ensure authenticity, and confirm that the testator genuinely intended the document to operate as a valid will.
The courts have interpreted the requirement of presence through case law over many years. Traditionally, the law required not merely physical proximity but also the opportunity to observe the act being carried out. The courts developed the principle that a person is “present” if he or she has the opportunity of seeing the relevant act and is mentally conscious of what is taking place. A leading authority is Brown v Skirrow, where the court emphasized that presence depends upon the ability to perceive the act if attention were directed toward it. Thus, someone in the same room but unable to see the signing because of physical barriers or incapacity may fail the requirement. Conversely, a person need not actually watch the signature being written if he had the opportunity to do so and remained aware of the event occurring. This interpretation reflects the balance between strict legal formalities and practical realities in executing wills.
Before 2020, legal debate existed over whether the requirement of presence demanded actual bodily presence in the same physical location. Advances in technology raised questions about whether witnessing through video communication could satisfy statutory requirements. The issue became especially significant during the global coronavirus pandemic, when restrictions on physical contact and social distancing measures made traditional witnessing difficult. In response, the government introduced the Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020. This temporary amendment provided that, for wills executed on or after 31 January 2020 and initially before 31 January 2022, “presence” could include presence through videoconference or other visual transmission technology. The amendment applied to most section 9 witnessing requirements, though not to a person signing at the testator’s direction.
The temporary reform allowing remote witnessing represented a major development in succession law because the law of wills has historically insisted upon strict formal compliance. By recognizing virtual presence, the legislation adapted long-standing legal principles to extraordinary public health circumstances. However, the law still required real-time visual communication so that the parties could observe one another signing or acknowledging signatures. Audio communication alone would not satisfy the statutory requirement because visual observation remained central to preventing fraud or undue influence. Even under remote witnessing arrangements, practical difficulties could still arise, particularly where documents needed to be physically transferred between parties for signature. Consequently, legal professionals generally continued to recommend physical witnessing whenever safely possible, reserving remote witnessing for exceptional situations.
The concept of presence therefore illustrates the importance of procedural safeguards in the law of wills. The formal witnessing requirements protect vulnerable testators, reduce disputes about authenticity, and strengthen confidence in testamentary documents. Courts continue to treat these formalities seriously because mistakes in execution may render an otherwise valid will ineffective. The temporary expansion of the concept through electronic communication also demonstrates how legal systems can adapt traditional doctrines to changing technological and social conditions while still preserving the fundamental objectives of certainty and protection against fraud. Presence in succession law is therefore not merely a matter of physical location but a legal mechanism ensuring transparency, authenticity, and reliability in the making of wills.
In the law relating to wills, the term presence refers to an important legal requirement governing the valid execution of a will under the Wills Act 1837. Section 9 of the Act requires several acts connected with signing and witnessing a will to occur in the “presence” of the relevant parties. Where another person signs the will on behalf of the testator, that person must do so in the testator’s presence and at the testator’s direction. The testator must also sign or acknowledge the signature in the presence of at least two witnesses, and those witnesses must themselves sign or acknowledge their signatures in the presence of the testator. Additionally, the witnesses must be present together when witnessing the execution. These formalities exist to reduce fraud, ensure authenticity, and confirm that the testator genuinely intended the document to operate as a valid will.
The courts have interpreted the requirement of presence through case law over many years. Traditionally, the law required not merely physical proximity but also the opportunity to observe the act being carried out. The courts developed the principle that a person is “present” if he or she has the opportunity of seeing the relevant act and is mentally conscious of what is taking place. A leading authority is Brown v Skirrow, where the court emphasized that presence depends upon the ability to perceive the act if attention were directed toward it. Thus, someone in the same room but unable to see the signing because of physical barriers or incapacity may fail the requirement. Conversely, a person need not actually watch the signature being written if he had the opportunity to do so and remained aware of the event occurring. This interpretation reflects the balance between strict legal formalities and practical realities in executing wills.
Before 2020, legal debate existed over whether the requirement of presence demanded actual bodily presence in the same physical location. Advances in technology raised questions about whether witnessing through video communication could satisfy statutory requirements. The issue became especially significant during the global coronavirus pandemic, when restrictions on physical contact and social distancing measures made traditional witnessing difficult. In response, the government introduced the Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020. This temporary amendment provided that, for wills executed on or after 31 January 2020 and initially before 31 January 2022, “presence” could include presence through videoconference or other visual transmission technology. The amendment applied to most section 9 witnessing requirements, though not to a person signing at the testator’s direction.
The temporary reform allowing remote witnessing represented a major development in succession law because the law of wills has historically insisted upon strict formal compliance. By recognizing virtual presence, the legislation adapted long-standing legal principles to extraordinary public health circumstances. However, the law still required real-time visual communication so that the parties could observe one another signing or acknowledging signatures. Audio communication alone would not satisfy the statutory requirement because visual observation remained central to preventing fraud or undue influence. Even under remote witnessing arrangements, practical difficulties could still arise, particularly where documents needed to be physically transferred between parties for signature. Consequently, legal professionals generally continued to recommend physical witnessing whenever safely possible, reserving remote witnessing for exceptional situations.
The concept of presence therefore illustrates the importance of procedural safeguards in the law of wills. The formal witnessing requirements protect vulnerable testators, reduce disputes about authenticity, and strengthen confidence in testamentary documents. Courts continue to treat these formalities seriously because mistakes in execution may render an otherwise valid will ineffective. The temporary expansion of the concept through electronic communication also demonstrates how legal systems can adapt traditional doctrines to changing technological and social conditions while still preserving the fundamental objectives of certainty and protection against fraud. Presence in succession law is therefore not merely a matter of physical location but a legal mechanism ensuring transparency, authenticity, and reliability in the making of wills.
0 Comments