When a loved one dies without adequately providing for someone in their will, the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (IPFDA) offers a potential remedy. However, not all claimants are treated equally – a surviving spouse enjoys a distinctly privileged position to other disappointed individuals under the act. This difference was recently brought into focus in the case of Klein v Cripps Trust Corporation Ltd [2025] EWHC 688 (Fam) where the court had to assess a spousal claim under the IPFDA.

How a surviving spouse is treated under the Inheritance Act 1975

Under section 1(2)(a) of the IPFDA, a surviving spouse or civil partner may claim “such financial provision as it would be reasonable in all the circumstances of the case for a spouse to receive, whether or not that provision is required for his or her maintenance.” This contrasts sharply with the position of other eligible claimants, who are limited to provision for their maintenance only. In effect, practically speaking this means that spouses may be entitled to a  more generous share of the estate—even if their basic financial needs are already met.

A further consideration afforded to spouses and civil partners that the courts may consider under s3(2) is “the provision which the applicant might reasonably have expected to receive if… the marriage had been terminated by divorce rather than death.” In other words, courts must consider, alongside other factors,  the same principles they would apply in a divorce financial settlement—meaning that a surviving spouse is more likely to receive a substantial award under the IPFDA.

A case study – Klein v Cripps Trust Corporation Ltd [2025] EWHC 688 (Fam)

Mr Klein passed away in 2020, leaving behind an estate worth approximately £6 million. He had been married to the claimant for 16.5 years, during which she took on a traditional homemaker role, enabling Mr Klein to run his businesses and receive care in his later years. In his will, Mr Klein left his wife £300,000 and a further £100,000 for their son with 90% of the residuary estate being settled on a charitable trust.

When considering what award to make, the court briefly considered what the claimant would have expected to receive in a divorce, using the factors set out in section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act as a guide.

Award

The court concluded that the will failed to make reasonable financial provision for the claimant and made an award which increased her inheritance substantially from £300,000 to £2,864,089 which included:-

• The transfer of the family home to the wife (valued at £1 million)
• A lump sum of £1,864,890 incorporating her immediate capital needs, capitalised income needs and the income needs of their son Elliot for the next 5 years.

The decision in Klein v Cripps Trust Corporation Ltd reinforces how the IPFDA treats surviving spouses as a special category—with courts willing to award generous provision that goes beyond maintenance if the circumstances of the case justify this.

Rebecca Kershaw – Apprentice Solicitor