RSPCA loses £2m battle over will (From The Northern Echo)
Send us your pictures, video, news and views by texting NORTHERN ECHO to 80360 or email us
Christine Gill wins will battle
8:20am Wednesday 1st December 2010 in News
WHERE THERE’S A WILL: University lecturer Christine Gill
A UNIVERSITY lecturer last night spoke of her delight after winning a four-year legal battle to reclaim her £2m family farm left to the RSPCA by her mother.
The animal charity now faces huge legal costs after failing to overturn an earlier ruling that handed 287-acre Potto Carr Farm, in Potto, North Yorkshire, to motherof- one Christine Gill.
Speaking after the decision by the Court of Appeal, in London, Dr Gill said she was looking forward to settling back into life on the farm that she loved.
The RSPCA’s appeal was dismissed by the nation’s top civil judge, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, sitting with Lord Justice Lloyd and Lord Justice Jackson.
The ruling means Dr Gill, 60, will get the farm as well as her mother’s £200,000 savings.
The RSPCA will get nothing – and may have to pay both parties’ legal costs, which totalled £1.3m before this week’s two-day appeal hearing.
Dr Gill said last night: “I am delighted that the Court of Appeal has upheld the High Court decision to overturn my mother’s will.
“It was a matter of huge regret and disappointment to me and my family that the RSPCA chose not to accept the original decision, forcing us to endure another court hearing.
“We can now settle back into our lives on the family farm that I love, and which I have dedicated many years to maintaining.”
Dr Gill’s mother, Joyce, and her father, John, signed mirror wills in 1993 that left the farm to each other and then, after they both died, to the RSPCA.
Mr Gill died in 1999, but Dr Gill, who works part-time at the University of Leeds, found out she had received nothing only when her mother died seven years later.
Judge James Allen, sitting at the High Court in Leeds, ruled last year that Dr Gill’s mother suffered from agoraphobia and was “coerced”
into signing the will by her “domineering” husband, John.
The judge accepted that Mrs Gill Snr signed the will, leaving everything to the RSPCA, despite having “an avowed dislike” of the charity.
Dr Gill’s solicitor, Mark Keenan, from Mishcon de Reya, said the Court of Appeal was still to explain its reasons for the ruling.
He said: “We cannot provide detailed comment at this stage. However, we are delighted that the Court of Appeal has upheld Judge Allen’s decision that this will did not reflect Mrs Gill’s wishes.”
Despite last year’s High Court ruling, legal issues have prevented Dr Gill from entering her parents’ farmhouse, although she has been able to farm the land.
The RSPCA said it felt strongly that Mrs Gill’s wishes were clear and the judgement in favour of Dr Gill failed to recognise that.
A spokesman said: “It also undermines the very essence of testamentary freedom that this country enjoys.
“The Gills had already provided substantially for their daughter during their lifetime, which included a large contribution towards the purchase of the farmhouse in which she now lives.”
It emerged at the earlier court case that Dr Gill had sacrificed her career to help her parents and then ran the farm and cared for her mother after her father’s death.
She and her husband, Andrew Baczkowski, bought a dilapidated farmhouse next to her parents’ farm in the belief they would one day be able to join the properties together.
Previous hearings heard how Dr Gill – an only child – had been given repeated assurances she would inherit the farm when her parents died.
Comments(20)
smokin
says...
9:53am Wed 1 Dec 10
msg expat
says...
10:53am Wed 1 Dec 10
kel28
says...
2:11pm Wed 1 Dec 10
msg expat wrote:well i am actually surprised... i mean what is the point of making a "WILL" if its not going to be stood by... surly if money was left to the RSPCA then that is where it should be distributed.
Can I third that? I'm disgusted that the RSPCA, who knocked on my front door last week begging for money, have wasted so much money pursuing this claim. It seemed obvious to me from day one who the rightful owner was and I'm glad justice has been done.
foobs the elder
says...
2:12pm Wed 1 Dec 10
hailbopps
says...
2:32pm Wed 1 Dec 10
im utterly disgraced in the greed of this women
Bambooflyrod
says...
2:56pm Wed 1 Dec 10
Hailbopps - have you bothered to actually read the case in full. The mother was bullied and coerced by the father into making the will. She even had “an avowed dislike” of the charity.......
Now you may not agree with that but two of the highest Courts in the Land agreed.
She didn't 'take' from the Charity, it should never have been theirs in the first place.
As to her being selfish, if you read the article, and previous ones, it clearly states that Dr Gill sacrificed her career to care for the mother and the farm.
catodur
says...
2:59pm Wed 1 Dec 10
hailbopps wrote:hailbopps, you have completely misunderstood. She received NOTHING from her mother. ALL was given to the RSPCA. Dr Gill seems to have been nothing but a dutiful daughter, and the behaviour of the RSPCA in this case has been shameful. It is not just individuals who are greedy.
I think its disgusting how GREEDY some people are she was left a hansome sum of £200,000 but still felt the need to take from a charity, what a truely selfish individual !!! If her mother wanted her to get it it would of been expressed in her final wishes but 2 go against ur mothers wishes just for your own gain and to take much needed money off helpless animals that need it, im sure much more than this horrible women!!!
im utterly disgraced in the greed of this women
entitled opinion
says...
4:24pm Wed 1 Dec 10
smokin
says...
5:10pm Wed 1 Dec 10
when after finding a litter of puppies and my friend phoning the RSPCA she was told leave the gate open and the dog catcher will probably pick them up
and that is caring ?
get real the only ones they care about are themselves and their wage packet
stevegg
says...
6:53pm Wed 1 Dec 10
entitled opinion
says...
7:07pm Wed 1 Dec 10
smokin wrote:I would never be so greedy as to go against any of my family members last wishes and would honor any decision that they made prior to passing away. I would be grieving for them rather than seeing how much money I could gain for myself knowing that they could not fight for what they wanted. It is a disgrace that any of you even consider this acceptable behaviour. You name one example when the RSPCA have not given good advice but that does not make up for all of the good work they do and for all of the animals that they do save. I personally have had good and bad experiences of them but am thankful that they are there because they do attend to alot of animals that are in need. They are not there to take in any waif and stray and your friend could have quite easily got off their backside and taken the dogs to the council pound themselves. It is people like your friend that drain their resources and like every organisation they have to draw the line somewhere otherwise they would be completely over run with animals that are other wise fit and well. It is about time people took more responsibility themselves rather than expecting to pick up the phone and someone comes running. What exactly would we do with all of the suffering animals if the RSPCA did not exist? If you now find an animal in distress, one that is suffering or you know of someone mistreating an animal what are you going to do? Who will you call up? I am sure that the first organisation you will still call is the RSPCA.
I don't understand you "entitled opinion" I do hope it never happens to you and as for this charity I have personal experience of them being absolute rubbish at " caring for " animals when after finding a litter of puppies and my friend phoning the RSPCA she was told leave the gate open and the dog catcher will probably pick them up and that is caring ? get real the only ones they care about are themselves and their wage packet
Safewings
says...
7:51pm Wed 1 Dec 10
They have no defence as the majority of animal welfare based animal organisations and a growing number of people despise what they have become, in a word the most complained about UK charity, which says it all. They are now sadly fuelled by greed and ignorance.
Bambooflyrod
says...
9:31pm Wed 1 Dec 10
kristal27
says...
12:44pm Thu 2 Dec 10
Bambooflyrod
says...
4:58pm Thu 2 Dec 10
kristal27
says...
6:25pm Thu 2 Dec 10
Bambooflyrod wrote:LOL! -oh REALLY....;-) Dr. Gill said that so it must be true
kristal27...I think if you read all the facts, Dr Gill wasn't aware of the will until after her mothers death.
Bambooflyrod
says...
6:37pm Thu 2 Dec 10
kristal27 wrote:Well, two of the highest Courts in the Land believed it so do you know something that they don't. I think they would be in possession of more facts than we are given in a couple of news articles.
Bambooflyrod wrote:LOL! -oh REALLY....;-) Dr. Gill said that so it must be true
kristal27...I think if you read all the facts, Dr Gill wasn't aware of the will until after her mothers death.
GSDJayne
says...
10:18am Sat 4 Dec 10
The RSPCA is one of the wealthiest charities in the UK and rakes in £120m a year from the unsuspecting public who think it helps lots of cute furry animals. It doesn't, it funds their luxurious HQ, inflated salaries (some 6 figure), index linked pensions and executive company cars.
Contrary to what the public think, the RSPCA branches are franchised businesses responsible for raising all their own funds and who have to pay the very wealthy HQ a sum of money every year for the 'franchise'.
Remember that from their own published figures from the trustees report, in 2009 they killed a total of 63,231 animals an increase of over 3000 on 2008. Their figures show that they kill an average of a staggering 22 dogs and 33 cats every day of the year. This is an animal welfare charity?!!!
Most large charities have lost sight of their original purpose and are nothing more than job creation schemes who use their tax free status to accumulate vast wealth to reward their executives.
Ponder this thought - if there were no animal cruelty, or excessive numbers of unwanted pets they would all be out of a job.
Congratulations Christine, put this awful experience behind you and know that you have helped wake up the public to what the RSPCA are really about.
Adam Walker
says...
10:09pm Tue 7 Dec 10
darlo1 says...
9:46am Wed 1 Dec 10