Many disputes over inheritance are not really about money – they are about the emotions and values that money provokes.

When a parent dies, adult children may experience strong emotions that lead to inheritance disputes. This is especially likely if a sibling believes they were treated unfairly during the parent’s lifetime or feels undervalued by the provisions of a will. Because the parent is no longer there to explain their choices or keep the peace, sibling relationships can come under severe pressure.

A sibling may have been excluded from decisions about a parent’s care, overlooked or treated differently from their brothers or sisters. They may also be shocked by a last-minute change to a will.

Blended families create more complexity in relationships, and this can increase the likelihood of a dispute.

These disputes commonly arise from three connected issues:

• perceived unfairness between siblings,
• estrangement or unmet needs, and
• disagreement about whether a will reflects the parent’s true wishes.

The following cases show how the courts approach each situation.

For example, in a case decided in 2025, three adult children discovered shortly before their father Michael Gymer’s death that he had had a long-term extramarital relationship and two children with another woman. He then died without a will (‘intestate’), so under the Intestacy Rules his estate, worth £461,000, was to be divided equally between his five children. Two sons from his marriage, Gregory and Lee, contested this partly because their mother’s share of the estate had passed to their father when she died a few months earlier. Mrs Gymer had been unaware of her husband’s ‘secret’ children, and Gregory and Lee argued that she would not have wanted them to benefit from ‘her’ share. They brought the case under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the Act). The judge agreed and awarded £170,000 to Mrs Gymer’s estate, to be divided between Gregory and Lee.

Every case turns on its own specific facts, and it can be difficult to predict the outcome of a claim.

Parental estrangement is not necessarily a bar to an adult child bringing a claim under the Act against a parent’s estate; in the case of Howe v Howe, Jenna was the only child of Roger Howe who died on 27 March 2020.

She was excluded from her father’s will; he had previously made it clear that he considered her to be ‘lazy’, ‘useless’ and ‘grasping’. Jenna first tried unsuccessfully to challenge the validity of the will. She then brought a claim under the Act for ‘reasonable financial provision’. Although she had been estranged from her father for a long time, the judge found that her health needs, which prevented her from working, gave her a strong claim. She was awarded £125,000 from an estate valued at around £1.4 million. The award was intended to pay her debts, buy ‘white goods’ and a car, meet her health needs and cover her income shortfall for ten years. The money was placed in a trust to protect her welfare benefits and prevent her from spending it unwisely.

Adult children’s claims under the Act can also fail. In Duggan v Duggan, the court rejected Sharon Duggan’s claim that her late mother’s £420,000 estate should be divided unequally between Sharon and her two sisters. Agnes Duggan died in August 2018, leaving her estate equally between her three daughters. Sharon had cared for her mother since 2014 and lived with her in the family home. She argued that her physical and emotional needs, and the fact that she had two rescue dogs, meant she needed to remain in the house for life. The judge noted that Sharon had lived there rent-free and that it was not the court’s role to ‘reward meritorious conduct’. The judge also rejected her claims that she was unable to work and that Agnes had been estranged from her other daughters:

“this is a modest estate and Agnes had two other daughters to think of. Essentially, provision was made for Sharon by giving her one third of the estate’.

Claims about unfair provision under the Inheritance Act 1975 and challenges to the validity of a will are two different legal routes. The first accepts the will or intestacy as valid but argues that the outcome does not make reasonable financial provision; the second argues that the will itself should not stand.

So, another way siblings can become involved in an inheritance dispute is by challenging the validity of a will. There are several grounds on which such a challenge may be brought. In a recent case, Aysel Gencay was disinherited by her mother, Dervishe Halil, who died aged 94 in 2021 and left her £1.1 million estate to her oldest son, Dogan Halil. In a side letter to her 2018 will, Dervishe accused Aysel of not speaking to Dogan and of failing to show her enough ‘love and respect’. After her mother’s death, Aysel challenged the will on the grounds that Dogan had exerted ‘undue influence’ and poisoned Dervishe’s mind against her. She also relied on ‘want of knowledge and approval’ and ‘fraudulent calumny’. Aysel argued that her mother had always said she would treat her children equally, that disinheriting her was contrary to family expectations and custom, and that she had always been close to her mother. The judge rejected the challenge. The court found that Dogan had not acted dishonestly or been involved in drafting the will, and that Dervishe had attended her solicitor alone and was described by them as ‘mentally sharp’.

How to avoid inheritance disputes

• although it can be difficult, discussing arrangements openly during your lifetime can help
• everyone should make a will and use an insured, competent and qualified professional to prepare it
• review your will regularly and after any significant life events (eg marriage; as getting married revokes any will you have made)

If you are concerned about a will, an inheritance dispute or the administration of an estate, our specialist will dispute team can advise you on your options and help you understand your legal position. Call us on 0800 860 62 65 or email on info@ridleyandhall.co.uk