The brief reign of Lady Jane Grey in 1553, often referred to as the “Nine Days’ Queen,” serves as a compelling historical example of the legal issues surrounding undue influence and contested succession. While the events occurred in a vastly different era, the circumstances bear striking similarities to modern estate disputes, particularly those involving undue influence and testator capacity.

At the heart of the crisis was the dying King Edward VI, whose amended Devise for the Succession (the legal document outlining who would inherit the English throne after his death) excluded his Catholic half-sister Mary and instead named Jane Grey, a Protestant, as his heir. This decision was heavily influenced, if not entirely orchestrated, by John Dudley, the Duke of Northumberland, who sought to maintain Protestant control of the monarchy while securing his own political power.

In modern estate law, undue influence occurs when a testator (the person creating a Will) is manipulated into making decisions they would not have otherwise made. Typically, this involves:

• A susceptible testator: someone in a weakened or dependent state.
• A beneficiary with influence: someone who stands to gain significantly from the changes.
• Unnatural provisions: dramatic deviations from previous intent.

Sadly, each of these elements was evident in Edward VI’s altered Devise. The young king, extremely ill with tuberculosis, was vulnerable both physically and politically. His original succession plan favored male heirs of the Grey family, but under Dudley’s influence, it was hastily modified to name Jane Grey. This amendment was not widely supported and was arguably against Edward’s natural inclinations as King.

Dudley’s position as Lord President of the Privy Council gave him direct access to Edward, allowing him to exert significant pressure at a time when the king’s ability to make independent decisions was compromised. The result was an altered succession plan that served Dudley’s interests, namely his son, Guildford Dudley, who had recently married Jane Grey, further cementing the Dudley family’s political aspirations.

Had this situation occurred under today’s estate law, there would likely be strong grounds for contesting the succession plan based on undue influence. Courts would examine Edward’s health, the circumstances under which the amendments were made, and the extent of Dudley’s involvement. A modern probate court might question whether Edward was acting of his own volition or whether he was coerced by a powerful political figure.

Additionally, Jane Grey’s short-lived reign shines a light on another legal consideration, lack of popular and political support for an estate plan or succession decision can render it ineffective in practice. Just as family members or other beneficiaries may contest a modern Will in court, Mary I successfully challenged Jane’s claim to the throne, rallying broad support and ultimately restoring the Tudor line.

To avoid situations like this, ensure that any major changes to an estate plan reflect genuine intent, not external pressure, and maintain transparency when creating your estate plan. 

While the stakes in contemporary estate disputes are rarely as high as those surrounding the English throne, the fundamental legal questions remain the same: Was the testator’s decision truly their own, and was it made under fair and sound circumstances? The events of 1553 serve as a cautionary tale of how undue influence can alter succession plans. 

Estate disputes can create lasting divisions among families, but proactive planning can help prevent conflict before it begins. From drafting clear legal documents to setting up powers of attorney and healthcare directives, our team is here to guide you through every step of the estate planning process. Contact The Estate Planning & Legacy Law Center now to ensure your estate is handled according to your wishes!