G49, It seems that we are of more or less the same opinion on this one. As an Englishman there were no real rules to meet when I wrote my will. Aside from certain forms of language to make my wishes clear, there was little power given to anybody to change my whims to meet the requirements of others. I could, if I wish leave all my worldly goods to one favourite, or even the local dogs home should I care to do so and there was no law that made it incumbent upon me to settle anything on anybody. I can disinherit whomsoever I wish and provided I am of sound mind and not stupid enough to make verbal promises that can be challenged in court, the law says that my will is sacrosanct. My moral duty would of course not allow me to do any such thing and provided the government of the day fails to get it's hands on my worldly possessions and my wife is well catered for, then my children will inherit equally. I take it that most of us here are of the same mind. If I had any illegitimate children, that would cause a problem, but luckily it is not an issue that I have to address. It can always be overturned by an English court, but only in extremis.
So what is so different about Muslim law? Their law says they cannot leave as much to their daughters as their sons and they do not have to provide for illegitimate children or divorced wives. That's OK, under English law they have the same rights, so why make something special just to be different? I think it's more a matter of the Law Society looking for a new stream of income for their members. Do I want Sharia law here? No, but lets not call something special when it's not.
M.