Man wrote his last will on the back of Mr Kipling and frozen fish boxes

A man’s £180,000 fortune will go to a charity rather than his relatives after a will written on the back of cardboard food packaging was found to be valid.

Shortly before taking his own life in 2021, Malcolm Chenery started handwriting his will on the inside of a Young’s frozen fish fillets box.

After running out of space, he completed it on a Mr Kipling mince pies box.

It said all his worldly goods – a three-bed house, cash, his mum’s old jewellery and a large collection of ornaments and pottery – should go to The British Diabetic Association.

Malcolm favoured the charity as he had previously lost family members to the condition.

He wrote he did not want to leave anything to his sisters and nieces – who could have claimed his fortune in the absence of a valid will – as he had ‘long-standing bad blood’ with them.

After the charity tried to have the will legally admitted, they faced legal obstacles – because its two ‘pages’ were written on different boxes.

The High Court heard the second ‘page’ had been legally witnessed and signed by Mr Chenery’s neighbours.

But lawyers said the neighbours didn’t see the first ‘page’ – which said the house and contents should go to the charity.

The fact that the pages were written on different food boxes stirred doubts as to whether they could be admitted as parts of the same document.

Sam Chandler, representing the The British Diabetic Association, said the charity’s claim was uncontested and had ‘the support of family members’.

‘Various family members have explained that diabetes runs in the family, hence why he named the claimant charity as his principle beneficiary,’ he continued.

‘The two pages are written in the same pen. That seems to indicate they were made at the same time. There is overlapping subject matter.

‘We say the court should have no hesitation in proclaiming in favour of this document, comprised of two pieces for cardboard.

‘An intestacy would frustrate the testator’s intentions in light of what the family say about his intentions.’

High Court judge Master Katherine McQuail ruled in favour of the charity, saying it was clear Malcolm did not intend to die without clear instructions on how his estate should be handed out.

‘His family were not close and he would not have wanted his possessions to go to them. The document is clearly intended from its context to be a will. It was described to the witnesses as a will.’

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.