Contentious probate: How to contest a Will in England and Wales

Inheritance disputes rarely begin with somebody announcing that they intend to commence a probate claim. They begin with sentences such as: “That isn’t what Mum told me”, “Why was the Will changed so suddenly?” or “Why has nothing happened to the estate for two years?”

Grief, money and old family history are an unforgiving combination. A disagreement about a signature or bank account can quickly become a referendum on who did more, who was favoured and who was absent when it mattered. I have found that the legal position becomes much clearer once the emotional dispute is separated from the precise question the law must answer.

Quick answer: Contentious probate is the area of law dealing with disputes about Wills, probate and the administration of estates. A Will may be contested because it was not properly executed, the person lacked testamentary capacity, they did not know and approve its contents, they were coerced, or the document was fraudulent or forged. Other estate disputes may concern inadequate financial provision, mistakes in the Will, the conduct of an executor or ownership of an asset. These are different claims with different remedies and time limits.

This guide explains contentious probate in England and Wales, including the grounds for contesting a Will, who can bring a claim, caveats, evidence, deadlines and the ways in which inheritance disputes are resolved.

Scotland and Northern Ireland have different succession procedures. This article concerns England and Wales only.

Contents

• What is contentious probate?
• Start by identifying the real dispute
• Who can contest a Will?
• Grounds for contesting a Will
• What happens if a Will is invalid?
• Mistakes, rectification and interpretation
• Claims for reasonable financial provision
• Executor and estate administration disputes
• How to enter a caveat
• Can a Will be contested after probate?
• How to investigate a disputed Will
• How contentious probate disputes are resolved
• Time limits for contentious probate claims
• How much does contentious probate cost?
• Frequently asked questions

What is contentious probate?

In its strict procedural sense, contentious probate concerns disputes about whether a Will or other testamentary document is valid and whether a grant of probate or letters of administration should be issued, revoked or altered.

In everyday legal use, the expression is often applied more broadly to almost any dispute arising after a death. This can include claims for financial provision, disagreements about the interpretation of a Will, applications to remove an executor and arguments about whether property belongs to the estate.

That broader use is understandable, but it can obscure an important point: not every disappointed beneficiary is contesting the validity of the Will.

A person may accept that the Will was validly made but argue that it failed to provide reasonably for them. Another may accept both the Will and its distribution but complain that the executor is not administering the estate properly. A third may say that a house registered in the deceased’s name was partly theirs already.

Each dispute requires a different legal analysis.

The ordinary stages before and after a grant are explained in my step-by-step guide to the probate process in England and Wales.

Start by identifying the real dispute

People often say that they want to “contest the Will” when the Will itself is not the real problem. Before entering a caveat or threatening proceedings, identify the result being sought and the legal route capable of producing it.

Several claims can arise from the same facts. For example, an adult child may question whether a late Will was made with capacity while also considering a claim for reasonable financial provision if the Will is upheld. The possible claims should be assessed separately rather than bundled together as a general allegation of unfairness.

Who can contest a Will?

Being related to the deceased does not automatically give somebody the right to challenge a Will’s validity. The claimant normally needs a genuine legal or financial interest in the outcome.

This may include a beneficiary under an earlier Will who would inherit more if the disputed Will failed, or a relative who would inherit under the intestacy rules in England and Wales if there were no valid Will.

An executor may need the court to determine which document should be admitted to probate. A person claiming the right to administer the estate may also have an interest in a dispute about the grant.

A person named only in the disputed Will would not ordinarily improve their position by having that document declared invalid, although they may defend it against a challenge.

Different eligibility rules apply to a claim for financial provision. A spouse, child or dependant may qualify under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 even if they would receive nothing under an earlier Will or on intestacy.

Can a child contest a parent’s Will?

A child cannot overturn a Will merely because they were excluded, received less than a sibling or consider the distribution morally unfair.

They may challenge the Will if they have evidence supporting a recognised ground of invalidity. Alternatively, they may be eligible to seek reasonable financial provision under the 1975 Act.

Those two routes are explained in more detail in can a parent disinherit a child?

Grounds for contesting a Will

A court does not decide whether a Will was kind, sensible or fair. It asks whether the document was legally valid and represented the free, informed testamentary decision of the person who made it.

The Will was not properly signed or witnessed

Section 9 of the Wills Act 1837 requires a Will to be in writing and signed by the testator—or by somebody else in their presence and at their direction—with the intention of giving effect to it.

The signature must be made or acknowledged in the presence of two witnesses who are present at the same time. Each witness must then sign or acknowledge their signature in the testator’s presence. The witnesses do not have to sign in each other’s presence.

A defect in this process can invalidate the Will. Questions commonly arise where the witnesses were not together, the testator did not acknowledge an earlier signature, somebody signed on the testator’s behalf, or the document was incomplete when signed.

A professional-looking document is not necessarily valid. Equally, a homemade Will can be valid if the legal requirements were properly observed.

There is a presumption in favour of due execution where a Will appears regular on its face and contains a conventional attestation clause, but that presumption can be displaced by credible contrary evidence.

A beneficiary acting as a witness does not usually invalidate the entire Will. Instead, the gift to that witness—or to their spouse or civil partner—will normally fail under section 15 of the Wills Act, provided there remain enough valid witnesses.

The formal requirements appear in section 9 of the Wills Act 1837. My separate guide explains more about writing a legally valid Will.

The deceased lacked testamentary capacity

A person must have the necessary mental capacity at the time the Will is made. The traditional test comes from the nineteenth-century case of Banks v Goodfellow and remains the principal test for testamentary capacity.

In broad terms, the testator must understand that they are making a Will and what it will do; have a general understanding of the property being disposed of; appreciate the people who might reasonably have a claim on their estate; and not be affected by a disorder of the mind that influences the distribution.

A diagnosis of dementia does not automatically mean that every later Will is invalid. Capacity is specific to the decision and time. A person may have difficulty with some aspects of daily life but retain testamentary capacity, particularly during a period of clarity.

The reverse is also true. A person can appear socially fluent and still lack the ability to understand the scale of their estate or the effect of a complicated Will.

Evidence may include medical records, the Will-drafting file, notes made when instructions were taken, evidence from witnesses and observations from people who saw the deceased around the relevant date. A retrospective expert opinion may sometimes be required.

The deceased did not know and approve the contents

Testamentary capacity and knowledge and approval are related but distinct. A person may have the general capacity to make a Will yet not understand or approve the particular document placed before them.

This issue can arise where the testator could not read, had serious sight or language difficulties, signed a document prepared by a major beneficiary, or believed the document contained different provisions.

The court will consider whether the circumstances surrounding preparation and execution create suspicion. Where they do, the person seeking to rely on the Will may have to produce sufficient evidence to satisfy the court that the testator knew and approved its contents.

An unexpected Will is not automatically suspicious. People are entitled to change their minds, make unequal gifts and exclude relatives. The concern must relate to whether this testator truly understood and approved this Will.

The Will was produced by undue influence

Undue influence in probate means coercion. The testator’s own free decision must have been overborne so that the resulting Will expressed another person’s wishes rather than theirs.

Persuasion, persistent requests, emotional appeals and family pressure do not necessarily amount to undue influence. The question is whether the testator could still exercise a genuine choice.

Unlike some disputes about lifetime transactions, there is no automatic presumption of undue influence simply because the beneficiary occupied a position of trust. The person alleging coercion must prove it.

Direct evidence is uncommon because coercion rarely occurs in front of independent witnesses. A court may draw an inference from the whole factual picture, including the testator’s vulnerability, isolation, dependence, abrupt changes in the Will and the beneficiary’s involvement. However, suspicion alone is not proof.

Assertions of undue influence should therefore be made carefully. A forceful personality, an unpleasant family member or a surprising gift does not by itself establish coercion.

The Will was fraudulent or forged

A forged signature or fabricated document is invalid. Evidence may involve the original document, handwriting analysis, ink or paper examination, metadata, witness testimony and comparison with known signatures.

Fraud may also occur where the testator signs because they have been deliberately deceived about the nature or contents of the document.

A rarer allegation is fraudulent calumny. This involves poisoning the testator’s mind against a potential beneficiary by making dishonest allegations that the person spreading them knows to be false, or does not care whether they are true.

Fraud and forgery are serious allegations requiring proper evidential foundations. They should not be included merely to make a disputed case sound stronger.

The Will had been revoked

A document that was validly made may later have been revoked. Revocation can occur through a later Will or codicil, a written declaration executed with Will formalities, or deliberate destruction by the testator—or by somebody acting in their presence and at their direction—with the intention of revoking it.

Marriage or civil partnership will normally revoke an earlier Will unless it was made in contemplation of that particular marriage or civil partnership.

Disputes also arise where the original Will cannot be found after death. If it was last known to be in the testator’s possession, questions may arise about whether they destroyed it intending to revoke it. That is an evidential presumption, not an automatic conclusion, and it may be rebutted by evidence showing that the document was lost or accidentally destroyed.

The statutory methods of revocation are set out in section 20 of the Wills Act 1837.

What happens if a Will is declared invalid?

If the court pronounces against the latest Will, the estate will not simply be distributed according to what the judge considers fair.

An earlier valid Will may take effect. If there is no earlier valid document—or it does not dispose of the whole estate—the intestacy rules may apply.

The outcome should be investigated before proceedings are started. A claimant might spend a substantial amount invalidating a Will only to discover that an earlier Will leaves them no better off.

The court may, in an appropriate case, pronounce against only part of a testamentary document. Whether the remaining provisions can stand depends on the nature of the defect and the wording of the Will.

Where a grant has already been issued in respect of an invalid Will, the claim may also seek revocation of that grant.

Mistakes, rectification and interpretation

Not every badly worded or mistaken Will is invalid.

A Will may be validly executed and fully understood, yet fail to carry out the testator’s intentions because of a drafting mistake. Alternatively, its wording may be capable of more than one legal interpretation.

Rectification of a Will

Section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 allows the court to rectify a Will where it fails to carry out the testator’s intentions because of a clerical error or a failure to understand the testator’s instructions.

Rectification is not a general power to improve an unfair or poorly planned Will. The evidence must establish both the relevant intention and the qualifying reason why the document failed to express it.

An application must normally be made within six months of the date on which representation was first taken out. The court can permit a later application, but that discretion should not be treated as an extension that will be granted routinely.

See section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982.

Interpreting an ambiguous Will

Sometimes the question is not whether the wording was inserted by mistake but what it legally means. The court can determine the proper construction of the Will by considering its language and, within the applicable statutory rules, relevant evidence of the surrounding circumstances and the testator’s intention.

Examples include an unclear description of a beneficiary, contradictory clauses, uncertainty about which property was intended or a gift whose wording no longer fits the assets owned at death.

Executors should not guess at an ambiguous provision and distribute on the basis of whichever interpretation seems most convenient. A mistaken distribution can expose them to personal liability.

A valid Will can still be challenged for financial provision

A claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 does not allege that the Will is invalid. The applicant accepts that the Will—or the intestacy rules—governs the estate but argues that it fails to make reasonable financial provision for them.

People who may qualify include:

• a spouse or civil partner;
• a former spouse or former civil partner who has not remarried or entered another civil partnership;
• a person who lived with the deceased in the same household as though they were spouses or civil partners throughout the two years immediately before death;
• a child of the deceased;
• somebody treated by the deceased as a child of the family; and
• somebody who was being maintained wholly or partly by the deceased immediately before death.

Eligibility only gives the person the right to apply. It does not mean the claim will succeed.

A surviving spouse or civil partner benefits from a broader standard based on what would be reasonable in all the circumstances. For most other applicants, the court considers what provision would be reasonable for their maintenance.

The court examines factors including the applicant’s resources and needs, the resources and needs of other beneficiaries, the deceased’s obligations, the size and nature of the estate, disability and other relevant conduct or circumstances.

The application must normally be issued within six months of the first grant of representation. The court may allow a late claim, but nobody should plan on obtaining permission. A claim can be issued before the grant where that is necessary.

The current legislation is available at the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

Should a caveat be entered for a financial provision claim?

Not ordinarily, if the only complaint is that a valid Will makes inadequate provision. A caveat is intended to prevent the grant where there is a genuine probate dispute, such as a question about the Will’s validity or the person entitled to apply.

Entering a caveat merely to create leverage in a 1975 Act claim can be inappropriate and may result in an application to remove it and an order for costs.

Indeed, obtaining the grant starts the usual six-month period for the financial provision claim and may enable the personal representatives to collect assets needed for a settlement.

Executor and estate administration disputes

Sometimes the Will is perfectly valid and nobody disputes who should inherit. The problem is the way the estate is being handled.

Beneficiaries may be concerned about prolonged inactivity, missing estate accounts, an uninsured property, an unexplained payment, a sale at an apparent undervalue or an executor placing their personal interests ahead of the estate.

Possible remedies depend on the problem. They can include seeking information or accounts, asking the court for directions, requiring the restoration of estate assets or applying to remove or replace the personal representative.

Poor communication alone will not necessarily justify removal. Nor does an executor have to carry out every instruction given by a beneficiary. The central question is whether the estate is being administered properly.

Where delay is the main concern, see how long an executor can take to distribute an estate.

Where a change of personal representative may be required, my detailed guide explains the grounds and procedure for removing an executor.

How to enter a caveat and stop probate

A caveat is a notice placed on the probate record that prevents a grant of representation being issued while a genuine dispute is investigated.

It may be appropriate where there is concern about whether a Will exists, whether the proposed Will is valid, which Will is the latest, or who has the right to apply for the grant.

A caveat must be entered before the grant is issued. It can be entered even if an application for probate has already been submitted, provided the grant has not yet been made.

The person entering it must be at least 18. The current fee is £4. The caveat initially lasts for six months and can be extended for further six-month periods. An extension can be requested during the final month before expiry.

Applications can be made online or by submitting form PA8A. Official instructions are available in the Government’s guide to stopping a probate application.

What does a caveat actually do?

A caveat prevents the Probate Registry from issuing the grant. It does not determine whether the Will is valid, remove an executor, freeze every asset or decide who should inherit.

It also does not usually prevent assets passing outside the estate, such as a jointly owned home passing to the surviving joint tenant.

A caveat buys time to investigate, communicate and, where necessary, start the correct proceedings. It should not be used as an inexpensive way of indefinitely paralysing an estate.

What happens if the executor issues a warning?

A person entitled to the grant can challenge the caveat by serving a formal warning.

The caveator then has 14 days, including weekends and bank holidays, to respond. If they have a contrary interest—for example, they say the proposed Will is invalid and they would benefit under an earlier Will—they may enter an appearance.

Where there is no contrary interest but the issue concerns equal entitlement to the grant or the proposed applicant’s suitability, a summons may be the appropriate response.

If no response is made within the 14-day period and the required evidence of service is filed, the caveat can be removed.

An appearance can cause the caveat to remain in force beyond its original expiry. It may then require agreement or an order from a probate registrar or judge to remove it. A warning should therefore not be issued, or answered, without understanding the procedural consequences.

When should a caveat not be used?

Do not enter a caveat merely because you are surprised or disappointed by the Will. First establish what interest you would have if the document were invalid and what evidence supports the concern.

A caveat will also usually be the wrong tool where the complaint concerns only financial provision, executor delay after the grant or ownership of an asset outside the estate.

Can a Will be contested after probate has been granted?

Yes. The issue of a grant does not make an invalid Will permanently unchallengeable.

However, a caveat can no longer be used once the grant has been made. A formal claim may be needed to ask the court to pronounce against the Will and revoke the existing grant.

Every person claiming the right to administer the estate under the grant must normally be joined to a claim seeking its revocation.

Proceedings concerning the validity of a Will are governed by the specialist procedure in Part 57 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Delay can make the practical position significantly harder. Assets may have been sold, money distributed, witnesses may have died and memories may have faded. Claims may then be required against beneficiaries or others who received estate property.

Personal representatives who distribute while aware of a credible dispute may also expose themselves to personal liability. Conversely, an executor is not expected to withhold every estate indefinitely because somebody has made an unsupported accusation.

How to investigate a disputed Will

A strong claim begins with evidence rather than conclusions. “The Will feels wrong” may be a perfectly understandable starting point, but the court will need to know what happened, when it happened and how it affects legal validity.

Obtain the relevant documents

Once a grant has been issued, the Will normally becomes a public document. A copy of the Will and grant can be ordered through the Government’s probate records search.

Before probate, the Will remains private and the executor is not automatically required to provide a copy to every relative who asks. The practical position is explained in who can see a Will after death?

Previous Wills and codicils can be crucial. They show how the deceased’s intentions developed and whether the disputed document represented a sudden departure or part of a consistent plan.

Request information from the Will writer

A prospective challenger may send what is commonly called a Larke v Nugus request to the solicitor or other professional who prepared the Will.

The request may ask about the instructions, the people present, the testator’s apparent capacity, the explanation given, the execution process and any earlier dealings.

It does not provide an automatic right to every item in the professional’s file. Disclosure should be approached in accordance with the legal and professional rules applying to disputed Wills. The Law Society publishes guidance for practitioners dealing with disputed Wills.

Preserve the original Will

The physical document may contain important evidence. Do not write on it, remove or replace staples, repair tears with tape or attach further papers.

Questions about staple holes, page substitutions, different inks or an apparently altered signature can become difficult to investigate if well-meaning family members have “tidied up” the document.

Prepare a factual chronology

Record relevant events such as earlier Wills, diagnoses, hospital admissions, bereavements, changes in carers, family disputes, property transactions, meetings with the Will writer and the date of execution.

Separate facts personally witnessed from family information and speculation. Contemporary messages, letters, diary entries and appointment records are generally more useful than memories reconstructed after the dispute has begun.

Consider medical and witness evidence

Medical records may assist in a capacity claim, but a diagnosis alone rarely answers the legal question. Evidence from the Will writer and attesting witnesses may be equally or more important because they observed the testator close to the relevant time.

Neighbours, carers, friends and financial advisers may also have useful evidence about the deceased’s understanding, relationships and expressed intentions.

Expert evidence should be obtained for a defined legal purpose. An expensive report commissioned before the relevant records and factual evidence have been assembled may answer the wrong question.

How contentious probate disputes are resolved

Pre-action correspondence

There is no single dedicated pre-action protocol covering every contentious probate claim. The general Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols will normally require the parties to exchange proportionate information before issuing proceedings.

A letter of claim should identify the legal basis of the case, the material facts, the remedy sought and the important documents relied upon. The response should explain what is accepted, what is disputed and why.

The purpose is not to rehearse every family grievance. It is to allow the parties to understand and investigate the legal dispute, narrow the issues and consider settlement.

The relevant general requirements appear in the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct.

Negotiation and mediation

Many inheritance disputes settle without a trial. Negotiation can occur through correspondence, a round-table meeting or mediation with an independent mediator.

Mediation is often particularly useful where the dispute involves both legal uncertainty and damaged family relationships. It can produce practical arrangements that a judgment might not, including staged payments, a sale timetable, transfer of a particular asset or agreed administration by an independent person.

A mediator does not decide who is right. Settlement remains voluntary unless and until an agreement is reached.

Parties should nevertheless take dispute resolution seriously. Courts can encourage or order participation in an appropriate process, and conduct relating to mediation may affect the eventual costs decision.

Formal court proceedings

If the validity of the Will cannot be agreed, a probate claim can seek a court order pronouncing for or against the document or revoking a grant.

Probate claims follow Part 57 of the Civil Procedure Rules and its supporting practice direction. They are commonly dealt with in the Chancery Division or a Chancery district registry, although some suitable claims can be heard in the County Court.

Testamentary documents must be lodged and the parties must provide the evidence required by the specialist rules. A default judgment cannot simply be obtained because another party fails to defend the claim.

If the estate requires protection while the validity dispute continues, the court can in an appropriate case arrange for an independent administrator to preserve and manage it pending the outcome.

Can the family simply agree which Will to use?

The beneficiaries can often compromise their financial interests, but they should not pretend that a legally invalid document is valid or instruct an executor to distribute contrary to the governing Will without a proper legal mechanism.

A settlement may involve a variation, contractual compromise or court order. If children, protected parties, unborn beneficiaries or charities are affected, additional approval or representation may be required.

Tax consequences should also be considered before terms are finalised. A family agreement that divides the money acceptably may produce an avoidable tax result if documented incorrectly.

Time limits for contentious probate claims

There is no universal deadline described accurately as “the time limit for contesting a Will”. It depends on the legal claim.

Will validity claims

A pure challenge to a Will’s validity is not normally governed by one short statutory period equivalent to the six-month Inheritance Act deadline.

That does not make delay safe. The court may consider acquiescence, waiver, laches and the prejudice caused by delay. Once an estate has been distributed and evidence has disappeared, the practical and legal obstacles increase sharply.

Do not rely on a generic statement that everybody has 12 years to contest a Will. Different limitation rules can apply to related claims concerning estate property, trusts, negligence or fraud, but there is no single 12-year rule covering every probate dispute.

Financial provision claims

An application under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 must normally be issued within six months from the date on which representation was first taken out.

Permission is required after that date. Anyone considering such a claim should act well before the deadline rather than assuming negotiations will stop time running.

Rectification claims

An application to rectify a Will under section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 must also normally be made within six months of the first grant. A later claim requires the court’s permission.

Executor and ownership claims

Claims against personal representatives and disputes about ownership, promises or trusts can be subject to different limitation provisions. The correct cause of action must be identified before a deadline can safely be calculated.

The safest practical rule is to investigate immediately. Delay rarely improves a contentious probate case.

How much does contentious probate cost?

There is no standard figure. The cost depends on the type of claim, the evidence, the number of parties, the value and complexity of the estate and whether the dispute settles or proceeds to trial.

It is dangerous to assume that the estate will pay everybody’s legal fees. The court has a broad discretion, and a person who unreasonably brings, defends or prolongs proceedings can face a substantial personal costs order.

The proportionality of the dispute matters. A claimant should consider not only whether they may be legally right, but the likely financial result after costs, tax, delay and the risk of losing.

I deal separately with the general costs rule, probate exceptions, mediation, funding arrangements and practical cost control in costs in contentious probate claims.

Frequently asked questions about contentious probate

The right question can prevent the wrong claim

An inheritance dispute can feel like one large argument, but the law sees a series of narrower questions. Was the Will properly executed? Did the deceased understand it? Was somebody coerced? Is the Will valid but financially inadequate? Is the executor the real problem? Does the disputed property actually belong to the estate?

Answering that first question carefully can save months of pursuing the wrong procedure. It also makes a sensible resolution more likely because the parties can discuss the legal problem rather than every disappointment the family has accumulated over the years.

Strong contentious probate cases are built patiently: protect the position where necessary, preserve the documents, assemble a reliable chronology, investigate before alleging wrongdoing and keep the remedy proportionate to the estate.

For related guidance, visit my probate and estate administration guides.

Last legally reviewed: 5 August 2026

This guide is based on general principles of English and Welsh law, is intended for informational purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice or establish a professional relationship.

About the author, Clare Lowes