.webp)
Banks v Goodfellow test
Whats on this page
The Banks v Goodfellow test remains the leading common-law authority for testamentary capacity. Banks v Goodfellow test matters because it is still the reference point in Will-making and probate disputes, even where people loosely talk about ‘capacity’ in more general Mental Capacity Act language. Understanding what the test really requires helps reduce confusion and improves the quality of testamentary evidence.
What Banks v Goodfellow established
Banks v Goodfellow is the leading common-law test for testamentary capacity. It sets out what a person must understand in order to make a valid Will and remains central in probate and Will-dispute practice.
Why the case still matters now
Although mental capacity is often discussed in more general Mental Capacity Act terms, testamentary capacity continues to be approached through the Banks v Goodfellow framework. That is why the case remains so important in practice.
The core elements of the test
In broad terms, the person must understand the nature of making a Will and its effects, the extent of the property being disposed of, and the claims of those who might expect to benefit. The assessment also has to consider whether any disorder of mind distorts the testamentary decision.
How the test differs from general MCA wording
The test is related to, but not identical with, the Mental Capacity Act’s statutory framework for other decisions. That difference is one reason testamentary work needs its own careful analysis rather than generic capacity language.
How the test is applied in real cases
In practice, application of the test depends on the actual Will-making circumstances, the records available, the person’s reasoning and whether any disorder of mind appears to have affected the dispositions they wished to make.
Common misconceptions
A common misconception is that any dementia diagnosis prevents Will-making. Another is that a person must understand every technical legal detail. Neither is correct if the real testamentary elements are still met.
What evidence usually matters
Evidence may include the Will file, attendance notes, medical records, direct assessment if undertaken during life, and surrounding information about the person’s assets, relationships and expressed intentions.
Why the case matters in disputes
Because Will disputes often arise after the testator has died, the clarity of the evidence and the legal fit of the opinion become especially important. Banks v Goodfellow provides the structure against which those disputes are often argued.
What a strong report should show
A strong testamentary report should tie the evidence directly to the Banks v Goodfellow elements rather than only using broad shorthand about capacity. That is usually what makes it more persuasive in probate work.
Frequently asked questions
Is Banks v Goodfellow still the key Will-making test?
Yes. It remains the leading authority on testamentary capacity.
Is testamentary capacity exactly the same as the MCA test?
No. The tests are related, but testamentary capacity still turns on the Banks v Goodfellow framework.
Does dementia automatically prevent Will-making?
No. The question is whether the person meets the testamentary test at the time the Will is made.
Related pages and services
These related pages connect this guide to the wider shared authority guides pathway.
Need to connect this authority page to a decision-specific issue?
Use the related pages below to move from the legal or procedural framework into the decision-specific guides and assessment pathways that apply it in practice.