Skip to main content
WUHLD
← Back to insights

SRA Will Writing Compliance in Transition: A Regulatory Checklist for the Law Commission's Modernising Wills Reforms

· 21 min

Executive Summary

Solicitor practices engaged in will writing confront a dual compliance imperative. The SRA's December 2024 probate thematic review exposed systemic documentation failures across supervision, competence, and quality assurance, while Legal Ombudsman wills and probate complaints rose 28% in 2024/25.12 Concurrently, the Law Commission's May 2025 Modernising Wills report and draft Bill propose structural reforms including electronic wills, a statutory capacity test replacing Banks v Goodfellow, and expanded court dispensing powers.3 Over eight months since publication, the Government has provided no interim response, and no legislative timetable exists.4 This article provides a structured dual-track compliance checklist: the first track addresses enforceable SRA obligations grounded in the Codes of Conduct effective 11 April 2025; the second offers a gap analysis framework for the draft Bill's provisions, enabling COLPs and practice managers to document regulatory readiness regardless of legislative outcomes.

1. The Compliance Landscape: Current Obligations and Enforcement Evidence

The regulatory framework governing will writing in solicitor practices has undergone material strengthening since late 2024. The SRA Standards and Regulations, made by the SRA Board on 16 December 2024 and effective from 11 April 2025, establish the current baseline for individual and firm-level compliance.5 Practitioners must understand these obligations not as abstract standards but as actively enforced requirements, contextualised by recent regulatory data that reveals significant gaps between expected and actual practice.

Individual Obligations Under the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors

The Code of Conduct for Solicitors imposes personal accountability on each regulated individual. Paragraph 3.3 requires solicitors to maintain competence and keep professional knowledge and skills up to date. Paragraph 3.5 mandates consideration of clients' attributes, needs, and circumstances -- a provision with particular significance for will writing, where testamentary capacity, vulnerability, and the complexity of family structures directly affect advice quality. Paragraph 3.6 extends the competence obligation to those whom the individual manages or supervises.6 A serious failure to comply with the Code, whether in isolation or as part of a persistent pattern, may result in regulatory action -- placing individual practitioners at personal risk where will writing competence is not maintained and documented.

Firm-Level Obligations Under the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms

At the organisational level, the Code of Conduct for Firms requires effective governance structures, arrangements, systems, and controls to ensure compliance with regulatory obligations (paragraph 2.1). Paragraph 4.3 mandates that managers and employees are competent and maintain current knowledge across legal, ethical, and regulatory dimensions. The supervision obligation at paragraph 4.4 requires an effective system for supervising client matters, while paragraph 9.1 places responsibility on the Compliance Officer for Legal Practice (COLP) to take all reasonable steps to ensure compliance.7 The SRA's enforcement strategy makes clear that proactive compliance is expected; the regulator does not wait for client harm to materialise before taking action against systemic failures.5

SRA Guidance on Will Drafting Quality

The SRA's specific guidance on drafting and preparation of wills identifies four categories of quality failure that structure the regulator's assessment framework: inadequacy (incomplete estate coverage), legality (provisions contravening law), inconsistency (contradictory language or logic), and insufficient detail (omission of items, persons, or requests). The guidance requires firms to implement suitable quality controls, including systems for sampling and checking will writing work, and directs practitioners to the Law Society Wills and Inheritance Protocol and the STEP Code for Will Preparation as best-practice reference points.8 On executor appointments, the guidance reinforces Principle 7 (acting in clients' best interests): solicitors must not lead clients to believe that appointing a solicitor as executor is essential or the default position.9

Enforcement Evidence: The December 2024 Thematic Review

The SRA's probate and estate administration thematic review, published 13 December 2024 and conducted across a 25-firm sample, provides the most granular enforcement evidence available on will writing compliance standards.10

The competence findings were particularly instructive. Six of ten solicitor fee earners assessed were unaware of their continuing competence obligations. Four of 23 heads of department lacked awareness of competence duties. Only three individuals understood the Statement of Solicitor Competence. While 15 of 25 firms maintained written competence policies, staff in seven of those firms were unaware that the policies existed.10

The supervision data revealed structural gaps. Twelve of 25 heads of department received no peer review or oversight of their work. Of 30 files reviewed, only nine showed documented evidence of supervision -- despite all fee earners reporting that they believed supervision was adequate. The review also identified that only 12 of 23 firms acting as executors had conflict-of-interest controls in place.10

However, the review was not uniformly critical. Twenty-three of 25 heads of department completed regular formal training, and firms generally demonstrated consistent payment authorisation controls and attention to vulnerable client needs. The primary gap was documentation, not necessarily substantive quality -- a distinction with significant practical implications for compliance readiness.10

Three instances of potential misconduct were referred for investigation, comprising two accountant's report failures and one anti-money laundering non-compliance. These referrals underscore that systemic failures, even in ancillary compliance areas, can escalate from thematic review findings to formal enforcement proceedings.

The Complaints Trajectory

Legal Ombudsman data reinforces the regulatory picture. Wills and probate complaints rose 28% in 2024/25, with 1,128 complaints accepted -- the fastest-growing area alongside litigation. The most common complaint types were poor communication (24%), delay and failure to progress (23%), and failure to advise (19%). Total remedies awarded across all areas reached GBP 3,708,674.2 By Q1 2025/26, 81% of investigative outcomes showed evidence of poor service, the highest rate of any practice area, while poor complaint-handling reached 58%, rising from 47% in Q3 2024/25 to 52% in Q4 2024/25.11 The Legal Ombudsman's December 2025 spotlight on probate, published in response to the sustained rise, focused specifically on challenges in responding to beneficiary requests during estate administration.12

The Strengthened Practising Certificate Declaration

The SRA's autumn 2024 strengthening of the practising certificate declaration created an additional compliance mechanism. Solicitors must now confirm that they are up to date with all legal, ethical, and regulatory obligations relevant to their role, and have reflected on their practice and addressed identified learning and development needs. In the 2024 renewal cycle, 16 solicitors failed to make the required confirmation, and conditions restricting unsupervised practice were imposed on ten.13 Total competence-related reports increased from 11,177 in 2023 to 12,046 in 2024, indicating a trajectory of intensifying regulatory scrutiny.

2. The Reform Proposals: What the Draft Bill Would Change

The Law Commission's Modernising Wills report, published 16 May 2025, represents the culmination of a project originating in 2016 with a consultation paper in July 2017, a pause from 2019, resumption in July 2022, and a supplementary consultation paper in October 2023. The final report spans two volumes: Volume I containing 31 recommendations with analysis, and Volume II comprising a draft Bill for a new Wills Act with explanatory notes.3 The report proposes the most comprehensive reform of testamentary law since the Wills Act 1837.

Electronic Wills and the "Reliable System" Requirement

The Commission recommends that electronic wills should be capable of being formally valid, subject to a "reliable system" requirement. Such a system must verify the identity of the signatory, protect the will from unauthorised alteration or destruction, and clearly distinguish the original from copies.314 Critically, the definition of what constitutes a "reliable system" is deliberately left open to courts and future regulations; the Secretary of State would be expected to consult further before making secondary legislation specifying technical standards.

This deliberate deferral has significant implications for practice planning. Firms cannot determine specific technology requirements until regulations are made, rendering premature investment in electronic will platforms a compliance risk in itself. The Law Society has noted that electronic wills "raise important but challenging questions, especially on how safe electronic wills would be from fraud or undue influence against vulnerable people."15

Statutory Capacity Test: Banks v Goodfellow to MCA 2005

Recommendation 12 proposes replacing the Banks v Goodfellow (1870) common law test for testamentary capacity with a statutory test based on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 framework.316 The proposed statutory test would retain the substance of the four Banks v Goodfellow limbs -- understanding the nature of making a will, the extent of the estate, the moral claims to which the testator ought to give effect, and the absence of any disorder of mind or insane delusion -- but embed them within the MCA's principles, including the presumption of capacity and the emphasis on supporting decision-making.

Banks v Goodfellow remains the governing law as of January 2026. The case law line is unambiguous: Walker v Badmin [2014] confirmed its continued application; Clitheroe v Bond [2021] saw the Court of Appeal decline to substitute the MCA; Baker v Hewston [2023] described the MCA test as a "cross-check"; and Leonard v Leonard [2024] EWHC 321 (Ch) authoritatively confirmed Banks v Goodfellow as the "definitive test."317 Practitioners must continue to apply Banks v Goodfellow while noting the emerging best practice of using the MCA framework as a supplementary cross-check.

Court Dispensing Power, Undue Influence, and Further Reforms

The draft Bill would grant courts discretion to validate wills that do not strictly comply with formality requirements, provided clear evidence of testamentary intentions exists. The Commission notes that similar powers in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have not led to disproportionate increases in litigation.318

Additional proposals include reforms to the law of undue influence, permitting courts to infer undue influence where reasonable grounds exist and shifting the burden of proof; a reduction in the minimum age for will-making from 18 to 16; abolition of the automatic revocation of wills upon marriage or civil partnership, responding to concerns about predatory marriages; expanded rectification powers where a drafter failed to understand the meaning or direct effect of language used; and extension of the witness-beneficiary rule to cohabitants of witnesses.319

The Remote Witnessing Gap

Any analysis of the reform proposals must address the regulatory gap created by the expiry of the remote witnessing provisions. The Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020 (SI 2020/952) permitted "presence" to include presence by means of video conference or other visual transmission. Originally applying retrospectively from 31 January 2020, the Order was extended to 31 January 2024 by SI 2022/18 and then expired without further extension.20 Parliamentary Under-Secretary Mike Freer confirmed in February 2024 that the "special circumstances that justified the amendment to the Wills Act 1837 no longer apply."2122

The draft Bill's electronic wills provisions and the expired remote witnessing order are not equivalent mechanisms. Practices that embedded video-witnessing into workflows between 2020 and 2024 face a specific compliance risk: residual procedures must be audited and confirmed as fully reversed. Any will executed after 31 January 2024 with witnesses present only by video link would not satisfy the formality requirements of the Wills Act 1837 and would be invalid.

Government Position and the Absent Response

The Government's initial response in May 2025, delivered by Sarah Sackman KC MP, Minister for Courts and Legal Services, welcomed the report but committed to no timetable: "The reforms proposed by the Law Commission are significant and wide ranging. They deserve detailed consideration."23 Under the protocol between the Lord Chancellor and the Law Commission, an interim response was due by approximately November 2025 and a full response by approximately May 2026.

No interim response has been published. In November 2025, Law Society president Mark Evans stated: "Six months on from the Law Commission's guidance to reform wills, there has been no movement from the government on updating this crucial law that affects every single one of us."4 The absence of a legislative timetable does not diminish the compliance imperative; it extends the period during which practices must maintain dual-track preparedness.

3. The Compliance Checklist: Current Obligations

The following checklist maps enforceable SRA requirements to specific practice-level actions. Each item references the relevant Code paragraph, thematic review finding, or Legal Ombudsman complaint category, enabling COLPs and practice managers to use this section as a self-assessment framework.

1. Individual Competence Documentation. Each solicitor undertaking will writing must maintain a current record demonstrating compliance with paragraph 3.3 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors.6 The thematic review found six of ten fee earners assessed were unaware of competence obligations;10 evidence of reflective practice, learning needs analysis, and continuing professional development completion directly addresses this gap.

2. Supervision Systems and Documentation. Firms must implement effective, documented supervision consistent with paragraph 4.4 of the Code of Conduct for Firms.7 File review records, peer oversight notes, and supervision meeting minutes provide the evidential trail the thematic review found absent in 70% of reviewed files. The SRA's effective supervision guidance requires that supervision arrangements be risk-based and proportionate, extending to all persons delivering legal services including partners and consultants.2410

3. Written Competence Policies with Staff Awareness Verification. Maintaining a written policy is insufficient if staff are unaware of its content. The thematic review found seven of 15 firms with policies had staff who did not know about them.10 Practices should implement documented acknowledgement processes, periodic awareness checks, and induction protocols that include competence policy review for all new joiners.

4. Capacity Assessment Protocols. All will instructions must include a documented capacity assessment applying the Banks v Goodfellow four-limb framework.317 Best practice, consistent with Baker v Hewston [2023], supplements this with an MCA 2005 cross-check. Practitioners should document the basis for any capacity determination, particularly where vulnerability indicators are present, satisfying paragraph 3.5 requirements to account for client attributes and circumstances.6

5. Executor Appointment Governance. Client files must evidence compliance with Principle 7 on executor appointments.9 Documentation should confirm that clients were informed of alternatives to solicitor-executor appointment and that no undue influence was exercised in the selection. The SRA guidance is explicit that solicitors must not lead clients to believe appointment of a solicitor as executor is essential or the default position.

6. Client Communication Standards. Engagement letters, costs information, and complaint-handling procedures must be documented and provided at the outset of the retainer. The Legal Ombudsman's complaint data -- with poor communication at 24% and failure to advise at 19% of wills and probate complaints -- identifies these as the primary consumer-facing risk areas.2 Timescale setting for will completion and regular progress updates address the delay and failure-to-progress category, which accounted for 23% of complaints.

7. Will Drafting Quality Controls. Practices must implement sampling and checking systems aligned with the SRA's four categories of quality failure: inadequacy, legality, inconsistency, and insufficient detail.8 Each completed will should pass through a documented quality review process prior to execution, with the reviewing practitioner recording their assessment against each of the four categories.

8. Conflict-of-Interest Procedures. The thematic review found only 12 of 23 firms acting as executors had conflict-of-interest controls in place.10 Documented procedures must cover witness-beneficiary conflicts, solicitor-executor appointments, and related-party transactions.

9. File Retention and Safe Storage. Original wills and associated documentation require secure storage with documented retrieval procedures. Retention policies should specify minimum periods consistent with Law Society practice notes and reflect the indefinite nature of will storage obligations.25

10. Practising Certificate Declaration Readiness. The strengthened declaration requires evidence of reflection and learning needs assessment.13 Will writing practitioners should maintain contemporaneous records sufficient to support the annual confirmation, recognising that failure to declare may result in conditions restricting unsupervised practice.

4. The Forward-Readiness Checklist: Gap Analysis for Draft Bill Provisions

The following checklist identifies operational changes each draft Bill provision would require if enacted. These items represent gap analysis, not implementation mandates. Practices are not required to adopt changes for unenacted provisions but are prudently positioned by documenting awareness and preparedness.

1. Electronic Wills -- Infrastructure Assessment. If enacted, the "reliable system" requirement would necessitate assessment of document management system capabilities, digital identity verification capacity, and electronic storage infrastructure capable of distinguishing originals from copies.314 Until regulations specify technical standards, practices should conduct a baseline capability audit without committing to specific technology platforms. Current will storage and retrieval procedures should be reviewed to establish whether digital integration is feasible within existing systems architecture.

2. MCA 2005 Capacity Test -- Training Needs Analysis. The proposed statutory capacity test would require practitioners to apply the MCA 2005 framework rather than Banks v Goodfellow as the primary test.316 Practices should identify training needs related to MCA principles -- including the presumption of capacity, the requirement to take practicable steps to support decision-making, and the functional approach to assessment -- while preserving current Banks v Goodfellow protocols until legislative change occurs. The "cross-check" approach already endorsed by the courts provides a natural transitional methodology.

3. Court Dispensing Power -- Enhanced File Documentation. The proposed dispensing power would enable courts to validate non-compliant wills where testamentary intention is clearly evidenced.318 This elevates the importance of comprehensive file notes documenting the testator's instructions, intentions, and reasoning, providing a contemporaneous evidential record should formal compliance ever be challenged.

4. Undue Influence Reforms -- Vulnerability Screening. The proposed shift in burden of proof would require practices to demonstrate proactive identification and management of undue influence risks.3 Client intake procedures, vulnerability screening protocols, and independent advice referral processes should be reviewed against the proposed standard.

5. Expanded Rectification -- Peer Review of Complex Drafting. The proposed expansion of rectification to encompass drafter misunderstanding of language used would increase the evidential focus on drafter competence.3 Systematic peer review of complex or non-standard drafting, with documented sign-off, would provide both quality assurance and a defensible record.

6. Marriage Revocation Abolition -- Client Advice Protocols. The proposed abolition of automatic revocation on marriage would fundamentally change client advice on will validity following life events.19 Practices should review client communication templates and standing advice protocols to identify where current advice references automatic revocation, enabling rapid amendment if the provision is enacted. The Law Society survey finding that 42% of solicitors supported the change suggests the profession itself is divided, reinforcing the importance of neutral, client-centred advice pending enactment.

5. Implementation, Monitoring, and Benchmarking

COLP Accountability

The COLP bears regulatory responsibility for ensuring compliance with the SRA's requirements under paragraph 9.1 of the Code of Conduct for Firms.7 The dual-track checklist framework should be formally adopted as a governance document, with the COLP accountable for periodic review and the practice's management board responsible for resource allocation. Compliance status should be reported to the firm's managing partners at regular intervals, with material gaps escalated for remediation.

Audit Cycle

An annual compliance audit, structured around the current-obligations checklist, provides the documented assurance the SRA's thematic review identified as the primary gap. Quarterly reviews of file sampling results, supervision documentation, and complaint-handling outcomes support continuous monitoring between formal audit cycles. Each audit should produce a written report identifying compliance status against each checklist item, action points for remediation, and target completion dates.

Quality Framework Benchmarking

Three established quality frameworks provide external benchmarks against which practices can calibrate their compliance position. The Law Society's Wills and Inheritance Quality Scheme (WIQS) requires compliance with the Wills and Inheritance Protocol, adoption of Core Practice Management Standards, mandatory training, self-reporting, random audits, and annual re-accreditation. The scheme mandates that the senior responsible officer has at least three years' experience in will drafting and estate administration.25 The STEP Code for Will Preparation, applicable to all STEP members as a condition of membership since 1 April 2014, covers transparency, ethical practices, conflicts of interest, and confidentiality; breach is subject to STEP's own disciplinary process.26 The SRA's own guidance on effective supervision specifies that supervision must be risk-based, applicable to all persons delivering legal services including partners and consultants, and that regulated work must be supervised by a practitioner with at least three years' experience.24

Monitoring the Legislative Timeline

The full government response to the Law Commission report is anticipated by approximately May 2026 under the Lord Chancellor-Law Commission protocol.4 Practices should diarise this milestone and designate a responsible individual for monitoring government publications, Parliamentary activity, and SRA guidance updates related to the proposed Wills Act. Any legislative introduction would be accompanied by a consultation period during which the forward-readiness checklist items would transition from gap analysis to implementation planning.

Conclusion

The compliance landscape for solicitor practices engaged in will writing is defined by two converging pressures: the intensification of current regulatory enforcement, evidenced by the SRA's thematic review findings and the sustained rise in Legal Ombudsman complaints, and the prospect of structural legislative reform proposed by the Law Commission's Modernising Wills report. The dual-track checklist approach -- anchoring compliance in enforceable current obligations while conducting documented forward-readiness assessment -- is both proportionate and defensible.

The connecting theme across both checklists is documentation. The SRA thematic review's most significant finding was not that practices were delivering poor substantive work, but that they could not evidence the quality of their processes. Practices that can demonstrate systematic compliance readiness -- through documented competence records, supervision trails, quality-assurance sampling, and gap analysis for proposed reforms -- are positioned for regulatory scrutiny regardless of legislative outcomes. The absence of a government timetable for the draft Wills Bill does not diminish this imperative; it reinforces it.

CPD Declaration

Estimated Reading Time: 18 minutes Technical Level: Advanced Practice Areas: Private Client, Wills and Probate, Legal Practice Management, Regulatory Compliance

Learning Objectives

Upon completing this article, practitioners will be able to:

  1. Identify the SRA Code of Conduct paragraphs governing will writing competence (3.3, 3.5, 3.6) and firm-level supervision obligations (2.1, 4.3, 4.4, 9.1)
  2. Distinguish between the Banks v Goodfellow (1870) capacity test, which remains current law, and the MCA 2005-based statutory test recommended by the Law Commission
  3. Evaluate the practice-level implications of the draft Wills Bill's electronic wills "reliable system" provisions against current operational infrastructure
  4. Apply the SRA's four categories of will drafting quality failure (inadequacy, legality, inconsistency, insufficient detail) to conduct a documented practice self-assessment

SRA Competency Mapping

  • Competency A: Ethics, Professionalism and Judgement -- maintaining competence and applying professional standards to will writing practice
  • Competency C: Dispute Resolution and Proceedings -- understanding the proposed court dispensing power and its implications for file documentation standards

Reflective Questions

  1. What documented evidence of supervision and file review would the practice produce if subject to an SRA thematic review comparable to the December 2024 study?
  2. How would the adoption of the MCA 2005 statutory capacity test affect current capacity assessment procedures, and what training investment would the transition require?
  3. To what extent does the practice's current document management infrastructure support the "reliable system" requirements that the draft Bill's electronic wills provisions would impose?

Professional Disclaimer

The information presented reflects the regulatory and legislative position as of 2026-01-27. Regulations, tax rules, and professional guidance are subject to change. Readers should independently verify all information before acting and seek advice from appropriately qualified solicitors, financial advisors, or other professionals for their specific circumstances.

Neither WUHLD nor the author accepts liability for any actions taken or decisions made based on the content of this article. Professional readers are reminded of their own regulatory obligations and duty of care to their clients.

Footnotes

Footnotes

  1. SRA Thematic Review: Probate and Estate Administration (December 2024). https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/research-publications/probate-administration-thematic-review/ ↩

  2. Legal Ombudsman 2024/25 Annual Complaints Data and Insight. https://www.legalombudsman.org.uk/information-centre/data-centre/complaints-data/legal-ombudsman-202425-annual-complaints-data-and-insight/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  3. Law Commission, Modernising Wills: Final Report (HC 861, May 2025). https://lawcom.gov.uk/publication/modernising-wills-final-report/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11 ↩12 ↩13

  4. Law Society Press Release: "No Will to Act on Wills Reform" (November 2025). https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/contact-or-visit-us/press-office/press-releases/no-will-to-act-on-wills-reform ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  5. SRA Standards and Regulations (effective 11 April 2025). https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations ↩ ↩2

  6. SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors (effective 11 April 2025). https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  7. SRA Code of Conduct for Firms (effective 11 April 2025). https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-firms/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  8. SRA Guidance: Drafting and Preparation of Wills. https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/drafting-preparation-wills/ ↩ ↩2

  9. SRA Principles (effective 11 April 2025), Principle 7. https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/principles/ ↩ ↩2

  10. SRA Press Release: Thematic Reviews -- Professional Obligations in Probate (December 2024). https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/news/press/2024-press-releases/thematic-reviews-professional-obligations-probate/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  11. Legal Ombudsman 2025/26 Quarter 1 Complaints Data. https://www.legalombudsman.org.uk/information-centre/data-centre/complaints-data/202526-quarter-1-complaints-data/ ↩

  12. Legal Ombudsman Spotlight on Probate (December 2025). https://www.legalombudsman.org.uk/information-centre/news/spotlight-on-probate-how-to-be-reasonable/ ↩

  13. SRA Annual Assessment of Continuing Competence 2025. https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/research-publications/annual-assessment-continuing-competence-2025/ ↩ ↩2

  14. HJA Expert Comment: The Law Commission's Report on Modernising Wills Law (2025). https://www.hja.net/expert-comments/opinion/wills-probate/the-law-commissions-report-on-modernising-wills-law/ ↩ ↩2

  15. Law Society: Reform of the Law on Making a Will. https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/en/topics/private-client/reform-of-the-law-on-making-a-will ↩

  16. Society of Will Writers: Goodbye Banks v Goodfellow (2025). https://www.willwriters.com/blog/goodbye-banks-v-goodfellow/ ↩ ↩2

  17. Fifty Six Law: Leonard v Leonard -- High Court Confirms Banks v Goodfellow Test Remains Supreme (2024). https://www.fiftysixlaw.co.uk/leonard-v-leonard-high-court-confirms-banks-v-goodfellow-test-for-testamentary-capacity-remains-supreme/ ↩ ↩2

  18. Macfarlanes: Modernising Wills -- The Law Commission Publishes Its Final Report (2025). https://www.macfarlanes.com/what-we-think/102eli5/modernising-wills-the-law-commission-publishes-its-final-report-102kbjb/ ↩ ↩2

  19. Law Commission, Modernising Wills: Final Report Volume II -- Draft Bill for a New Wills Act (May 2025). https://lawcom.gov.uk/publication/modernising-wills-final-report-volume-ii-draft-bill-for-a-new-wills-act/ ↩ ↩2

  20. Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020 (SI 2020/952). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/952 ↩

  21. Hugh James: Government Ends Remote Witnessing of Wills (2024). https://www.hughjames.com/blog/government-ends-remote-witnessing-wills/ ↩

  22. Hansard: Video-witnessing Wills, House of Commons Debate (1 February 2024). https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-02-01/debates/24020146000010/Video-WitnessingWills ↩

  23. Government Response to the Law Commission Report: Making a Will (May 2025). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-response-to-the-law-commission-report-making-a-will ↩

  24. SRA Guidance: Effective Supervision. https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/effective-supervision-guidance/ ↩ ↩2

  25. Law Society: Wills and Inheritance Quality Scheme. https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/firm-accreditations/wills-and-inheritance-quality-scheme/ ↩ ↩2

  26. STEP Code for Will Preparation (effective 1 April 2014). https://www.step.org/public/step-will-code ↩