Court caseAIR 1970 SC 1367

An old man suffering from diabetes and other ailments was admitted to hospital, where he was looked after by one of his sons. While there, and shortly before his death, he executed a settlement deed giving the whole of his property to that son, leaving out his wife and his other children. The excluded members of the family sued to set the deed aside as having been obtained by undue influence.

The Supreme Court set the settlement aside. The settlor's age, illness and dependence on the son placed the son in a position to dominate his will within s. 16(2)(b). A deed giving everything to one child and nothing to the wife and the other children was, on its face, unconscionable. The burden therefore shifted to the son to show that the transaction was the settlor's free and informed act, and he failed to discharge it: there was no independent advice and no explanation for excluding the rest of the family.