An Unconventional Will – Lessons from The British Diabetic Association vs Chenery

Can a Will Written on a Fish Finger Box Be Valid?

In a legal world still governed by the Wills Act 1837, an unusual case has reaffirmed that while courts may take a flexible approach to a testator’s intentions, they remain bound by the strict legal requirements of making a valid Will. The recent ruling in The British Diabetic Association vs Chenery offers important insights into what makes a Will valid—and why a note on the back of food packaging may be accepted while a digital Will may not.

Understanding the Legal Requirements for a Will

A Will in England and Wales must satisfy the requirements of Section 9 of the Wills Act 1837, which states that for a Will to be valid:

• It must be in writing and signed by the testator (or someone else in their presence and at their direction);

• The testator must intend their signature to give effect to the Will;

• The signature must be witnessed by two people at the same time;

• The witnesses must sign or acknowledge the testator’s signature in their presence.

This legislation has stood for nearly two centuries, despite the rise of digital assets, online banking, and technology-driven estate planning.

The Case of Mr. Chenery’s Will

Mr. Chenery wrote his Will on two separate pieces of cardboard—a mince pie box and a fish finger box. He signed the documents before asking two witnesses to attest the Will.

The claimants, The British Diabetic Association, argued that this document was valid, even though:

• The two pages were not physically attached;

• The document was already signed before being presented for witnessing.

The Court accepted the Will, ruling that:

• It was clear that the two pieces of card were intended to be his Will.

• By presenting them as his Will to be witnessed, his signature was deemed to have been acknowledged.

• There was no requirement that the pages be bound or that the witnesses had to see the first page, provided both parts of the Will were in the room at the time of signing.

Why a Digital Will Would Not Be Valid

Contrast this case with singer Max George’s statement that he made a Will on his phone before major heart surgery.

Unlike Mr. Chenery’s Will, a digital Will:

• Does not meet the signature requirements under the Wills Act.

• Lacks physical witnessing, meaning it would not be legally enforceable.

• Would only be considered an expression of wishes, rather than a formal testamentary document.

Implications for the Future of Wills

This case highlights the court’s commitment to ensuring that a testator’s final wishes are respected. However, until the law changes, traditional legal formalities remain key.

Key takeaways for those making a Will: ✔ Ensure it is properly signed and witnessed—electronic notes and digital files will not suffice. ✔ Keep a clear, structured document to avoid ambiguity. ✔ Seek legal advice to avoid potential disputes and ensure your wishes are protected.

While reforms to the Wills Act 1837 may be necessary to accommodate modern technology, the judgment serves as a reminder that adherence to legal formalities remains essential. If not, an estate may be subject to intestacy laws, distributing assets according to strict statutory rules rather than personal wishes.

If you require expert guidance on drafting or contesting a Will, our team is here to help ensure your estate planning is legally secure and aligned with your intentions.

Need legal advice? Contact us to stay ahead of 2025’s evolving competition law landscape.

David Orchard

+44 743 789 4552