Mabel's Wills
Following Lord Strickland's death in the second World War, in 1940, Mabel, drew up a Will which was only changed in 1975 when she was aged 76 and was carefully planning for her Strickland succession. In 1975 she chose her great nephew Robert Hornyold-Strickland (then only a UK national) as her sole and universal heir and she never changed her mind on this decision. Mabel died in 1988.
Mabel's 1975 Will was confirmed again in 1977, when new provisions were introduced requiring all wills to be supported by a Doctor's certificate. Clear typewritten copies of both wills were given to Robert by Mabel, together with a letter explaining her intentions very clearly.
In 1977, to ensure a smooth Strickland succession, Mabel tried to adopt Robert as her son. This process, although initially approved by the Courts, was blocked by the then Government, which changed the laws and the Constitution of Malta and then made these changes retroactive, with no reason being given. This action appears to have been aimed solely at frustrating Mabel's intentions and this was recognised as such at the time.
In 1978, only one year later, Robert was declared persona non-grata, in Malta, for political reasons. As a result, rather than being by his Aunt's side in Malta, learning the ropes of her various businesses in Malta, he was forced to move back to London. Robert was in exile for nine years until 1987. Undoubtedly, this was to put further pressure on Mabel's succession plans by deliberately separating her from her heir.
Robert has recently been given access to the 1978 Police files concerning this deportation, which clearly show that this was politically motivated at the time. Robert is now a dual National.
In 1979 Mabel was persuaded, by her new legal adviser Professor Guido de Marco, to change her Will. This 1979 Will was drafted by him, on his own admission and a number of significant bequests were changed. This final Will was further updated by a codicil in 1982 which became necessary because some of her 1979 instructions to her legal adviser had been omitted.
Mabel made provision for a contingent trust to be set up in her 1975 and her 1977 Wills. But this contingent trust was changed into a Foundation in 1979, becoming the Strickland Foundation that was specifically set up "for herself and her heirs in perpetuity" with certain other charitable and educational objectives. The rationale for the original trust was to safeguard Robert's inheritance position in the light of the Foreign Interference proposals, that were later enacted in 1982. This legislation precluded foreign ownership of significant Maltese enterprises.
A copy of the revised 1979 Will together with the Strickland Foundation founding deed was never given to Robert, despite Mabel immediately sending Prof de Marco over to London to inform Robert of these significant changes. However de Marco failed to meet up with Robert despite being in London long enough to do so. As a result, Robert knew nothing of the changed Will until after his Aunt's death in 1988.
Professor Guido de Marco and Professor Joseph Ganado were nominated to be the first testamentary executors of Mabel's estate, after her death (given that Robert's was not able to be in Malta at that time). These two Executors were also entrusted with Council membership of the Strickland Foundation - set up for Mabel "and her heirs in perpetuity".
1/2
Under Maltese law the heir, immediately, becomes the owner of all the deceased assets. Yet, at the same time, he also inherits a duty to pass on all valid and quantifiable legacies, pay off any debts of the deceased and any taxes due on the estate; the Executors are tasked with ensuring that the heir fulfils these obligations. Instead the executors, without ever consulting the heir, put the main legatee in possession of assets - to which they were not entitled - at the expense of the heir.
The Strickland Foundation was then left, by way of legacy, the majority of Mabel's estate but the validity and extent of these legacies is far from clear in the will, hence Robert's legal challenge.
After Mabel's death, Mabel's Executors chose to exclude her heir from any involvement in either her Strickland Foundation or the management of its assets. Instead they saw elected own two sons, Mario de Marco and Max Ganado onto the Strickland Foundation in 2009. However, Max Ganado has since resigned.
Apart from any legacy to the Strickland Foundation, Robert inherited the remainder of the estate with an obligation to pay off her debts and significant death duties. Robert has paid off all of Mabel's debts and the significant death duties, but has not been allowed to fully enjoy the fruits of his inheritance on a timely basis.
Robert was also given the only rights of use and habitation at Villa Parisio (Mabel's former home), with certain restrictions, under the terms of the final Will. But even this has been frustrated because the Executors and the Strickland Foundation have chosen to compete with the heir, despite them admitting in court that Robert is the only person entitled to live at Villa Parisio.
Articles of association of Allied Newspapers Ltd. clearly stating no 'Body Corporate shall be a shareholder'
Robert had lived at Villa Parisio, with his Aunt Mabel, during 1977 and 1978 and obviously knew the Villa well. The Villa has 7 bedrooms and 6 bathrooms. Robert was the only person who was left the rights of use and habitation at Villa Parisio - of the guests rooms, bathrooms and study.
Clearly Mabel intended her heir to come into her Villa through the front door as most people would enter a home. Yet, in early negotiation with the Executors, they expected Robert and his family had to come into the Villa through the gardeners entrance. Extraordinarily they expect Robert and his family to live, in one bedroom and one bathroom which is ridiculous given that Robert is married, has three children and 5 siblings, and a large number of cousins and friends whom, many of whom Mabel knew. Mabel entertained frequently as witnessed by her visitors books and it is known she would have wanted her heir to do the same. So to suggest that Robert and his family would be corralled into one bedroom and one bathroom is nothing short of risible.
Some bedrooms, bathrooms and other guestrooms have been rendered unusable by Council Members of the Strickland Foundation. They have locked the family belongings into certain rooms and refuse to give Robert access.
This interpretation of the executors, who are supposed to be acting in a bonus paterfamilias manner is nothing short of malicious and deliberately done to harass Robert and his family from the Villa.
The Will contains a caveat that Robert's right to live in the Villa with his family should in no way interfere with the work of the Foundation but this merits the common sense approach that a family's need to live in a home peacefully with full privacy should prevail over a business interest, especially when the Foundation can operate from a single room anywhere in Malta, a situation envisaged by Mabel in the very first article of her Foundation rules when she provided specifically for her Foundation to be able "to transfer its seat to any other place in Malta". Any administrators with common sense would have relocated and prevented all this totally unnecessary tension with Mabel's heir. That the Executors (who also were Council Members of the Foundation) persistently refused to invoke this real right of theirs, further demonstrates their deliberate policy of harassment of the heir in his home.
Nowhere in the Will does Mabel suggest that her home is to be run as a conference or party venue, thereby directly competing with heir. Nowhere in the Will did Mabel suggest that the sons of her Executors be given places on her Foundation in preference to her carefully chosen heir. Nowhere in the Will does it say that Robert is to be restricted to one bedroom and one bathroom. Mabel wanted her heir to live in her home and to continue to develop her legacy to Malta - not to be frustrated by the very people she placed into positions of trust to look after her estate and her heir. In fact, amongst Mabel's objectives for her Foundation was that of upholding human rights in Malta. If ever there was an example of trampling on an heir's human right to privacy in a home - to live peacefully with his family - this is it.
