Can my sister-in-law claim a share in the family business ten years after my mother's death?

My mother died ten years ago and my brother four years ago. My brother was married, had no family and had his own farm. His wife is now looking for her husband’s share of my mother’s assets.

My mother died without a will and developed dementia. Can a daughter-in-law make a claim? She is not related by blood and there are no children. I’ve checked everywhere I can think of and there’s nothing saying she can do that. If there were children, they would be entitled to their mother or father’s share if we were siblings, but no mention is made of a daughter-in-law.

My brother never filed a claim of any kind before transferring his mother’s property. He might have been a prospective beneficiary during his lifetime. There is something in the inheritance deed that mentions 50 percent of a spouse’s inheritance.

Mr NW

Oh, this is messy. And at first glance it seems like a textbook example of why the ‘informal’ agreements made within families on issues such as inheritance, land, property, etc. are so dangerous. It’s also a wake-up call for the hundreds of thousands of adults across the state who have never made a will.

Intestacy is a legal concept with very clearly defined rules about what should happen – none of which appears to have happened in this case. I have no idea how much land is at stake or what its value is, but it seems to me that your sister-in-law could have a stable business simply because everyone has just decided to let sleeping dogs lie.

Normally, a daughter-in-law would not automatically be entitled to an estate – either because she is left out of a will or, as here, when someone dies without a will.

As you say, she is not a blood relative, which is reflected in the fact that anything her mother would have left in a will would have been subject to the lowest of the three available tax-free thresholds – currently €20,000, but an equally high amount. more modest € 15,075 when your mother died ten years ago. The fact that she has children or not would also be irrelevant unless there had been a will leaving something to their father, who predeceased his mother, which did not happen in this case.

Therefore, if things had been done as they should have been done, your sister-in-law would have no claim whatsoever against her mother-in-law’s estate. But because everyone, for whatever reason, decided to bury their heads in the sand and do nothing to regularize your mother’s affairs, she may now have a claim.

When someone dies without a will, a close relative will normally apply to the court for administration – the legal power to manage the affairs of the person who left no will, or whose will is invalid. The Court’s rules provide that “persons having a beneficial interest in the deceased’s estate are entitled to an award of administration in the following order of priority.”

At the top of the list are a spouse or civil partner, a child, the children of a child who died before the person without a will, a parent, a brother or sister, children of predeceased siblings , cousins, grandparents, uncles and aunts, great-grandparents and then “other relatives of the nearest degree (of full or half blood)”. So in principle everyone who can claim the inheritance under the Inheritance Act.

If more than one person from the same group submits an application, the judge will determine who should bear responsibility. If no one files, the state can nominate someone, or a creditor of the estate (someone who is owed money by your mother) can request a letter of administration or have an attorney do it on his/her behalf.

As you can see, there is no role there for an in-law, that is, someone who is not related to your mother by blood.

However, there is also no provision in Irish law that simply ignores the who process, which appears to have happened here. Before the Succession Act, as I understand it, even though that was well before my time, it was common for land to simply be transferred to a first born, but that is before 1963 and certainly does not apply now.

I suspect, though of course I cannot be sure, that you and your brother mutually decided that you would take control of your mother’s land without having to go through any official process.

That might have worked if your mother had left a will leaving the land behind, but in the absence of that will, the law determines how her assets should be passed on. And in this case, where it appears there were two sons – you and your now deceased brother – the estate should have been divided equally between you. Otherwise you can’t choose.

Could that have happened and did your deceased brother return his share to you? Certainly, although that would probably have had tax consequences for you.

Could he have formally renounced his claim? I’ve never heard of this happening in the case of a will, but I see no reason why it wouldn’t be possible.

But the most important thing in any of these scenarios is that there would be a formal paper trail available.

If that were the case, your sister-in-law would get nowhere with her claim. However, if you and your brother simply ignored the Intestate Succession Act and the requirements for handling your mother’s estate in the six years before your brother died, she might be able to find an attorney willing to argue that she has a claim for unreasonable delay in settlement. a part of you and/or your brother.

Her argument would probably be that if the estate had been administered within a reasonable time frame, her husband would have inherited half of your mother’s estate, and it could then pass to her upon his death – assuming his will, if he has one, , generally makes her his beneficiary. Even if he dies without a will, in a situation where there are no children, she would be the sole beneficiary of his estate.

The 50 percent rule you refer to in inheritance law is, I assume, the statutory law. This means that your sister-in-law is entitled to at least half of her husband’s estate. That actually only applies if there is a will that leaves her less than that part. Under a will, she will receive at least two-thirds of his estate, even if they have children. In any case, it is not relevant to this case.

And to tie up loose ends: your mother’s dementia is also irrelevant. Either she made a will before she became incapacitated, or her estate is dealt with under a will, as is the case here.

So, as I said at the beginning, it’s messy. Actually unnecessary. You and/or your brother could have settled your mother’s estate years ago and then made your chosen arrangement between yourselves, subject to tax law. But if your argument is that neither of you did anything about your mother’s affairs for ten years, but that your sister-in-law should nevertheless have no claim, then I suspect you might be able to object to that.

And that can be expensive, regardless of who wins in the end.

It has actually been a long time since people in Ireland woke up to the fact that you cannot simply ignore the law when it comes to death and passing on family assets. And your situation is a good example of why.

Send your queries to Dominic Coyle, Q&A, The Irish Times, 24-28 Tara Street Dublin 2, or by email to [email protected] with a telephone number for contact. This column is a reading service and is not intended to replace professional advice