The Wills Bill 2025 is set to introduce one of the most meaningful updates to succession law in England and Wales in almost two centuries. A central feature of the draft bill is the legal recognition of electronic wills, which could change how wills are made, witnessed, and challenged. This modernisation follows the Law Commission’s extensive review and is seen as long overdue in a digital-first society.

Understanding Electronic Wills

An electronic will is a legal document made, signed, and stored in a digital format. Under the proposed bill, these wills will be considered valid if they meet certain formalities. The traditional requirement of two witnesses remains in place, but these witnesses could be present via live video link, building on temporary changes tested during the pandemic.

To ensure legal certainty, the draft law proposes using secure platforms that can record the digital signature and the witnessing process. A central registry is also under consideration, which would allow authorised parties to locate and verify wills more easily during probate.

The Draft Wills Bill 2025: What It Proposes

The Wills Bill 2025, drafted following recommendations by the Law Commission, proposes wide-ranging reforms to modernise how wills are made and interpreted in England and Wales. The draft law includes:

• Legal Recognition of Electronic Wills:The Bill allows valid wills to be created, signed, and stored digitally. They must meet core legal formalities to be valid, including being signed by the testator and witnessed (which may now happen via live video link).
• Secure Digital Execution:Electronic signatures and secure digital platforms will be required to protect against fraud and undue influence. These platforms should log the date, time, and participants involved in the will-making process.
• Remote Witnessing Made Permanent:The temporary COVID-era provision for remote witnessing will become a permanent feature of the law.
• Revocation by Marriage Removed:The rule that a will is automatically revoked by marriage or civil partnership, unless made in contemplation of the event, will be abolished. This change is intended to protect vulnerable individuals from inheritance loss in the case of predatory marriage.
• Minimum Age Lowered:The minimum age for making a valid will is reduced from 18 to 16, in line with other legal rights and responsibilities at that age.
• Capacity Test Modernised:The old Banks v Goodfellow test will be replaced with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 framework, offering clearer guidance for determining testamentary capacity.

These proposals reflect modern ways of living and working, reduce unnecessary disputes, and promote access to proper estate planning tools.

What This Means for Inheritance Cases

The introduction of digital wills could reduce the number of intestacy cases by encouraging more people to make wills. Accessibility for individuals who are housebound or abroad will also improve. This shift is expected to reduce disputes based on technical errors, common when wills do not meet formal signing requirements.

However, there are important legal questions that courts and practitioners will need to address. For example, how should revocation work in the digital space? Can deleting a file truly be treated as an intentional act to cancel a will? These issues will need careful handling to avoid confusion during probate.

Additionally, while increased access is welcome, some worry that people may try to make wills without professional help. Poorly drafted or misunderstood clauses could still lead to challenges, even if the will is valid. Legal advice will remain key, especially in complex cases involving trusts, blended families, or overseas assets.

Security, Capacity, and Fraud Concerns

The move to electronic wills also raises security concerns. The draft bill includes requirements for advanced digital authentication, but safeguards must keep pace with evolving risks. Digital forgery, undue influence, and questions around testamentary capacity remain real threats. To address this, the Bill applies the Mental Capacity Act 2005 capacity rules and offers courts greater discretion to review potential undue influence.

Practitioners are also calling for public education to ensure people understand what a valid will is and what the law requires. Without this, new risks may replace old ones.

Final Thoughts

The Wills Bill 2025 marks a major step forward for succession law in England and Wales. By introducing digital wills as a recognised format, the law aims to meet modern expectations while still upholding critical safeguards. This reform brings both opportunity and responsibility for legal professionals, testators, and beneficiaries.

The success of the Bill will rely on practical implementation and awareness. Wills are too important to leave to guesswork, and sound legal advice is highly valuable in a digital age as it has been on paper.

When separated parents share responsibility for a child, moving abroad is not something that can be done lightly. From a legal standpoint, such a move can impact every aspect of the child’s life, most importantly, their relationship with both parents. In the UK, family law sets out clear requirements to ensure that the child’s welfare remains the top priority.

Consent Is Not Optional

If both parents have parental responsibility, neither can take the child to live abroad without the other’s written agreement or a court order. This applies even if one parent has a child arrangements order stating the child lives with them.

Under the Children Act 1989, removing a child from the UK without proper consent may amount to child abduction, which carries serious legal consequences. A parent planning to relocate must first seek agreement from the other parent. If that fails, the next step is applying to the Family Court for permission, known as a “leave to remove” application.

Applying to the Court

To apply, the parent needs to submit a Specific Issue Order using Form C100. The court will assess the application based on the child’s best interests. This includes an early hearing to explore possible agreement, often involving CAFCASS (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service), who provide an independent report focusing on the child’s safety and wellbeing.

If the case progresses, both parents may need to prepare detailed statements. The judge will weigh factors such as:

• Emotional ties with both parents
• The impact of relocation on education and social life
• Living conditions and stability in the destination country
• A practical plan to maintain the child’s connection with the parent remaining in the UK

The child’s welfare is always paramount under section 1 of the Children Act 1989.

Blocking a Relocation

When a parent strongly disagrees with the proposed move, they can apply for a Prohibited Steps Order. This prevents the child from being taken abroad until the court decides. Alternatively, they might apply to vary the child arrangements order to ensure the child remains in the UK.

If possible, mediation is encouraged before court proceedings begin. However, if there’s no resolution, the process could take several months and involve multiple hearings.

Temporary Travel Versus Permanent Relocation

A child arrangements order allowing the child to live with one parent gives that parent the right to take the child abroad for up to 28 days without needing consent, provided there’s no interference with the other parent’s contact. Anything beyond that, including permanent moves, requires full agreement or court approval.

Practical and Legal Considerations Abroad

Moving to another country also means dealing with a foreign legal system. Issues like the recognition of UK court orders, future changes to custody, and enforcement of contact rights may not be straightforward. In these cases, the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 often applies, especially where both countries are signatories.

This treaty helps resolve international custody disputes, but not every country enforces it consistently. For this reason, getting advice from a solicitor experienced in international family law is important.

Final Thoughts

A parent cannot take a child abroad without addressing the legal consequences. UK courts are clear: any decision that affects a child’s living arrangements must be made with their welfare in mind. Legal processes may be involved, and they take time and preparation. If you are planning an international move or facing one, seeking early legal advice is the best step to protect your rights and your child’s wellbeing.

Deportation in the United Kingdom can be ordered when the Home Office considers a person’s presence no longer beneficial to society. One of the broadest and most serious reasons cited is that their removal is conducive to the public good. This concept is rooted in law but is not fully defined, leaving room for discretion depending on the facts of each case.

Legal Basis for Deportation on Public Good Grounds

The core legal power comes from section 3(5)(a) of the Immigration Act 1971, which states that any non-British citizen can be deported if the Secretary of State believes their removal would be in the interests of the public good. This discretionary power is not tied to any specific sentence or crime and is often used in cases involving serious misconduct or threats to safety.

Another significant statute is the UK Borders Act 2007. Section 32 of this Act places a legal duty on the Secretary of State to issue a deportation order against any foreign criminal. This is someone who is not a British or Irish citizen, convicted in the UK, and given a custodial sentence of 12 months or more. However, this duty is subject to several exceptions and legal protections.

What Kind of Conduct Justifies Deportation?

The Home Office applies this power to a range of conduct. The most common cases involve foreign criminals, but there are broader categories of concern:

• Repeat offenders, even if individual offences carry lighter sentences.
• People convicted of crimes that cause serious harm.
• Those involved in organised crime, terrorism, gang activity, or drug trafficking.
• Individuals who pose a risk to national security.
• People involved in immigration fraud, such as sham marriages or forged documents.

What qualifies as harmful enough to affect the public good is not fixed. It depends on context, seriousness, and public order or safety threat. The government’s guidance allows for this discretion, which means past behaviour, ongoing risk, and even non-criminal conduct may be relevant.

Discretion and Public Interest

The term public interest often appears in deportation cases. It refers to the broader aim of protecting the public, maintaining trust in the immigration system, and ensuring safety. When making decisions under the 1971 Act, the Secretary of State must weigh these factors against the individual’s arguments. The courts have confirmed that decisions must be reasonable and proportionate, especially when family life is at stake.

Human Rights Considerations

Even if someone’s removal is deemed necessary for the public good, it cannot breach the UK’s legal duties under the Human Rights Act 1998. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects private and family life rights. So, a deportation order must take into account things like:

• The person’s ties to the UK
• Family relationships
• Length of residence
• Impact on children, especially British citizens

Each case must be judged individually, with proper attention to these rights. Courts often step in if they believe the Home Office has not fairly balanced the risk to the public with the individual’s rights.

Who Is Exempt from Deportation?

Certain groups are legally protected from deportation:

• British citizens
• Irish citizens (except in very limited cases)
• Some Commonwealth citizens who have lived in the UK since before 1973

Also, section 33 of the UK Borders Act 2007 outlines exceptions that may apply to avoid breaches of international obligations or where deportation would cause serious injustice.

Final Thoughts

Deportation for reasons linked to the public good is a serious and far-reaching power in UK immigration law. It is most commonly applied in cases involving crime and national security but is not limited to those alone. The law gives the Secretary of State significant discretion, though each case must also respect legal safeguards, especially under human rights law.

Foreign nationals in the UK must be aware that serious misconduct, even without a long prison sentence, may lead to removal if it is believed to endanger the public interest. Legal advice is essential in such matters, as the process involves both technical legal standards and strong personal rights.

Deportation from the UK can have life-altering consequences. While the Home Office has strong powers under current immigration law, human rights protections remain critical for individuals facing removal. These protections apply in specific situations and are rooted in British law and international obligations.

Let’s look at when and how these protections apply and what steps individuals can take to defend their rights.

The Legal Foundation of Deportation

Deportation powers mainly come from the Immigration Act 1971, the UK Borders Act 2007, and the Immigration Act 2014. These laws allow the Home Secretary to remove non-British nationals, especially those with serious criminal convictions or irregular immigration status.

A key part of the 2007 Act is the requirement to deport foreign nationals sentenced to over 12 months in prison. This is automatic unless removal would breach a person’s human rights under the Human Rights Act 1998, which brings the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law.

Before deportation, the Home Office sends a formal “Notice of Intention to Deport.” At this stage, individuals can submit legal arguments explaining why deportation would be unlawful. These arguments often rely on specific rights protected by the ECHR.

Article 3: Absolute Protection from Harm

Article 3 of the ECHR protects individuals from torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. The UK cannot deport someone if there is a real risk that they would face such treatment in their home country. This is a strict rule, and there are no exceptions, even for those with criminal records.

Courts examine credible evidence such as past mistreatment, political or religious persecution, or country reports showing serious risks. If removal would likely lead to such harm, deportation must not proceed.

People from countries facing widespread violence, authoritarian rule, or poor prison conditions have successfully used this right.

Article 8: Respect for Private and Family Life

Article 8 offers a more flexible protection. It covers a person’s right to family and private life in the UK. This can include:

• Long-term relationships or marriage with British citizens
• Children born and raised in the UK
• Strong ties to British culture, language, and life
• Lack of support in the home country

However, Article 8 is not an absolute right. Courts must weigh the public interest, especially public safety, against the impact on the person’s life. The more serious the criminal history, the harder it becomes to rely on Article 8.

Still, many have successfully argued that deportation would cause extreme hardship to children or family members, particularly when children are British citizens or settled residents.

Other Legal Grounds for Protection

Beyond Articles 3 and 8, other rules may apply. If a person has been granted asylum or other forms of protection under the Refugee Convention, deportation may breach those rights. The UK must not send someone back to a country where their life or freedom is at risk due to their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or group membership.

In all cases, the Home Office must act lawfully and fairly. Its decisions must be based on up-to-date evidence, and those affected must be allowed to present their case.

Practical Steps for Those Facing Deportation

If you are threatened with deportation, take action without delay:

• Respond to any deportation notice by clearly stating whether you rely on human rights or protection grounds.
• Provide detailed evidence, such as medical records, school reports, letters from family, or expert opinions.
• Get professional legal advice. Legal aid is available in cases involving Article 3 or asylum grounds and may be granted in other situations under special funding rules.
• If your appeal rights are restricted, you may still be able to challenge decisions through judicial review in the High Court.

Final Thoughts

UK law recognises that some deportations can cause unacceptable harm. The Human Rights Act 1998 remains a key legal shield for individuals at risk. Article 3 offers absolute protection from torture or degrading treatment. At the same time, Article 8 ensures that family life and personal connections to the UK are respected, where the impact of removal would be too severe.

Those at risk should act quickly, prepare thoroughly, and seek expert help to give their claim the best possible chance. Despite political changes, the courts uphold these protections as essential to the UK’s legal and moral standards.

A divorce may bring emotional closure, but financial matters can remain unsettled long after the Decree Absolute. Many are surprised to learn that, in the UK, it is indeed possible to challenge or reopen a divorce financial settlement years after the fact. But this is only feasible in limited situations—and usually with a great deal of legal scrutiny.

No Time Limit Without a Court Order

The starting point is understanding the legal position under English and Welsh law. Under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, there is no statutory time limit to bring financial claims following a divorce, provided no final order exists. This means that if a court-approved Consent Order or Clean Break Order was never obtained, either party can apply to the court for financial relief—regardless of how much time has passed.

This loophole has caught many off guard. A marriage might have ended amicably, and assets divided informally, yet years later, one party may initiate a claim for a financial settlement after divorce. The absence of a formal order leaves the door open to claims for property, maintenance, pensions, and even lump sums.

When a Settlement is Legally Binding

The financial settlement becomes legally binding if the court has made a Consent Order. It prevents further claims unless both parties agree to revisit the arrangement or the court grants permission in extraordinary circumstances. Most people finalise their settlements using this route to gain certainty and avoid future disputes.

However, even a court-approved order can be challenged only in specific cases. Courts are extremely reluctant to reopen a matter that has already been settled. The burden of proof is high, and a successful application to set aside an order usually requires one of the following:

• Non-disclosure:If one party fails to disclose significant assets at the time of the agreement, the court may be persuaded to revisit the settlement.
• Fraud or mistake:This includes deliberate misrepresentation or relying on incorrect financial information.
• Barder events:Named after the case Barder v Caluori [1988], this applies when a completely unforeseen event changes the financial circumstances significantly shortly after the order was made.

Without one of these legal justifications, the court will generally not interfere.

Financial Claims Made Years Later

When no court order is in place, the risk of a delayed divorce financial settlement claim is real. The courts have heard cases where ex-spouses have brought claims more than 10 or even 20 years after the divorce.

That said, the passage of time does matter. Courts may be less inclined to grant large awards if the delay has prejudiced the other party. Judges consider both parties’ current financial needs, contributions, and the extent of delay.

Practical Advice

It is in everyone’s interest to formalise any financial agreement through the court at the time of divorce. Doing so provides certainty and finality. Without a Consent Order, a person remains financially tied to their ex-spouse long after emotional ties have ended.

If you believe your ex-partner concealed assets or your circumstances have changed drastically, you may wish to seek specialist advice. Conversely, if you are concerned about a late financial claim against you, consult a family solicitor to assess your position.

Final Thoughts

Yes, it is possible to challenge a divorce financial settlement years later in the UK. However, success largely depends on the legal framework in place and the reason for the challenge. Those with no formal court order remain vulnerable to future claims. Those with an order must demonstrate serious legal grounds to reopen the case.

Driving a non-UK registered vehicle on British roads is more than a matter of convenience or personal preference. It involves strict legal obligations, and the consequences for ignoring them can be severe. Understanding your legal responsibilities is critical if you’re considering using a foreign-plated car in the UK, either as a resident or visitor.

Residency Status and the DVLA Rules

The most important issue is residency. If you live in the UK, you cannot legally drive a non-UK registered vehicle. The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) requires UK residents to register and tax their vehicles in the UK. This falls under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994, which outlines the duties of vehicle keepers within the country.

Residency is not simply where you say you live; your presence and ties in the UK determine it. If you spend more than 185 days a year in Britain, you’re considered a UK resident under UK law. Owning a UK bank account, using a UK driving licence, or having a fixed address are all used as indicators. If caught driving a foreign-registered vehicle while considered a resident, the police can seize the vehicle under the Police Reform Act 2002. In some cases, it may even be destroyed.

Temporary Visitors and Exemptions

There is an exemption for temporary visitors. Non-residents can drive a non-UK registered vehicle in Britain for up to six months in any 12 months. However, the vehicle must still meet several criteria. It must be roadworthy, have a valid MOT if required (over three years old), and carry adequate insurance recognised in the UK.

This is covered under guidance provided by HM Revenue & Customs and the Road Traffic Act 1988, which regulate temporary imports and vehicle use by foreign drivers.

Make sure to carry documents that prove your non-residency, including proof of address abroad and return travel bookings. Failure to do so can result in mistaken enforcement.

Insurance and MOT Compliance

Driving without valid insurance in the UK is a serious offence. While some European policies may offer short-term coverage, many foreign insurers are not recognised. If your insurance is invalid or expired, you are considered uninsured under British law.

The Road Traffic Act 1988 makes it an offence to use a vehicle on the road without third-party insurance. Penalties can include fixed fines of £300, six points on your licence, or prosecution with unlimited fines and a potential driving ban.

Similarly, vehicles over three years old must hold a valid MOT certificate. The UK government takes MOT compliance seriously, and driving without one can result in fines, further penalties, or vehicle impoundment.

Police Powers and Enforcement

Police have wide-ranging powers to deal with improperly registered or insured vehicles. Officers often run spot checks using automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) technology. If they find a foreign-registered vehicle used by someone suspected of being a resident, they can seize it immediately.

During enforcement operations, police may ask for documents such as insurance papers, proof of residency abroad, and proof of the vehicle’s recent entry into the UK. The vehicle can be impounded if these aren’t provided on the spot or within a set time frame.

The DVLA, HMRC, and police forces coordinate operations to identify and penalise drivers breaking these rules. Recent crackdowns have led to thousands of seizures across the UK.

Other Legal Risks

Beyond insurance and registration, foreign drivers can face the same offences as anyone else: driving without a valid licence, drink or drug driving, careless driving, and ignoring police signals to stop. These are prosecuted under the same laws that apply to UK licence holders, including the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

For example, if you’re involved in an accident and your documents are not in order, you could be held personally liable, even if the accident wasn’t your fault.

Final Thoughts

Driving a non-UK registered vehicle in Britain, especially for UK residents, carries serious legal risks. Compliance is not optional. The vehicle must be registered, taxed, insured under UK standards, and have a valid MOT if you’re a resident.

For short-term visitors, strict conditions still apply. Keep your paperwork in order, understand the legal time limits, and ensure your insurance and MOT meet UK standards.

Enforcement has become more aggressive, with automatic checks and targeted operations by police and transport authorities. Taking chances with a foreign-plated car in the UK can result in heavy penalties, vehicle loss, and legal trouble.

People often assume UK Border Officers have unlimited powers, but that’s far from the case. Their authority is shaped by specific laws that give them power for border security purposes and set clear limits to protect individual rights. If you’re arriving in or leaving the UK, it helps to know what these officers are legally allowed to do—and where the line is drawn.

UK Border Officers are mainly responsible for checking who can enter or leave the country. They also look out for prohibited goods or illegal activity. Their powers come from legislation like the UK Borders Act 2007, the Immigration Act 1971, and the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979. Under these laws, they can search individuals and examine their belongings, but they must follow strict procedures and respect legal boundaries.

What Can Be Searched?

Border Officers can search people, baggage, and vehicles for documents that confirm identity, nationality, or the right to enter the UK. This includes passports, visas, and biometric residence permits. If someone is suspected of immigration offences, officers can also search their premises—but only with proper authorisation and a clear reason.

These powers are mainly used to prevent people from entering the UK unlawfully or using forged documents. Officers must be satisfied that the individual is either a British citizen or has legal permission to enter. Refusing to cooperate during these checks—such as not showing documents—can lead to refusal of entry or detention.

Searching Phones and Other Devices

When it comes to smartphones, laptops, or tablets, the rules get a bit more complex. Border Force officers can look at electronic devices if they believe there’s a reason to, such as to find documents linked to identity or prohibited goods. But they cannot force someone to unlock a device. That means you’re not legally required to share your password or PIN at the border.

Officers can seize a device if they suspect it contains illegal content, such as extremist material or indecent images. However, they can’t access personal data without your cooperation unless further legal steps are taken. Police officers have more power to demand access to data, but those apply outside the border setting and are usually under separate legislation.

Limits to Personal Searches

There are also clear limits on how people themselves can be searched. Officers must follow strict rules about conduct, privacy, and dignity. For example, a person can only be searched by an officer of the same sex.

If any clothing needs to be removed, it’s limited to outerwear like coats or gloves—unless there’s a more serious situation that requires an intimate search, usually at a police station or a private room with proper authorisation.

Documents covered by legal privilege—such as correspondence with your solicitor—are protected and cannot be seized. Also, any belongings taken for safety reasons during detention must be returned promptly once the risk has passed.

Body Scans at the UK Border

Full body scanners are now a common part of UK airport security. Passengers can be randomly selected to undergo a body scan before boarding. Those who repeatedly fail metal detectors must also go for this scan. This policy was introduced to address growing security concerns and is backed by UK government guidelines.

Only trained, authorised staff are allowed to carry out these scans. The image produced is generic and does not reveal personal features. Officers of the same sex as the passenger must be the ones to view the image, and scans must not be used in a way that discriminates based on age, gender, race, or religion.

Privacy is a key concern, and several safeguards are in place. Images cannot be stored, copied, or transferred. Once viewed, they are deleted immediately. Passengers selected for a scan must comply, as the UK follows a “no scan, no fly” rule—refusing a scan can mean being denied boarding.

Some critics have raised concerns that this policy offers no alternative screening options, which may raise questions about legality and equality. The UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission has cautioned that scans should be proportionate, based on risk, and implemented without unfair impact on certain groups.

There’s also a separate process for cases involving suspected drug smuggling. If officers believe someone may be internally concealing substances, more advanced scans like X-rays or CT scans can be used—but only with clear medical and legal safeguards. These are not routine and require consent, medical supervision, and a strong reason to proceed.

If you believe your rights were violated during a body scan, legal advice can help. A solicitor can assess the actions taken by border authorities, advise on possible discrimination or breaches of data protection law, and help you challenge any decision made due to the scan.

Safeguards and Procedures

Border Officers must also document what they’re doing. If a search of premises or personal property is authorised, a senior officer needs to record the reason, what they’re looking for, and what grounds there are for suspicion. These procedural safeguards help prevent misuse of power and ensure transparency.

The balance here is important. On one side is the need for national security and effective immigration control. The other is the duty to respect privacy, dignity, and lawful rights. Most searches at the border are carried out quickly and professionally, but they must always meet legal standards.

If you believe your rights were violated during a search, legal advice can help. A solicitor can assess the actions taken by border authorities, advise on possible discrimination or breaches of data protection law, and help you challenge any decision made as a result of the scan.

Final Thoughts

UK Border Officers have strong powers, but those powers come with limits and responsibilities. They can search for documents, question travellers, and check belongings—but only within the law. Digital devices pose more of a challenge, as officers cannot compel you to unlock them unless additional legal powers apply. Understanding these boundaries can help both travellers and officers work through the process fairly.