A Beneficiary Says the Will Is Invalid: What Should an Executor Do?
The immediate task is to preserve the documents, establish the probate position and understand what is actually disputed. An argument about capacity requires different enquiries from an allegation of pressure, a disputed signature or dissatisfaction with an inheritance.
This guide is for executors and administrators dealing with an estate in England and Wales.
An Allegation Is Not a Finding of Invalidity
A statement that “the will cannot be right” may express a genuine concern, but it does not identify the legal basis of a challenge.
Equally, the executor should not dismiss a concern simply because the person raising it has not yet obtained the drafting file or supporting records. The first question is what specific facts are said to put the will in doubt, and what enquiries would help establish the position.
The executor should distinguish between:
- What the documents show.
- What each person alleges.
- What witnesses can describe from their own knowledge.
- What remains uncertain.
What Should the Executor Do Immediately?
1. Establish the Probate Position
Confirm which will is being challenged, whether any earlier wills or codicils exist, and whether a probate application has been submitted or a Grant issued.
Check whether a caveat has been entered, a warning served or court proceedings started. Retain the correspondence and record any stated deadlines.
If proceedings or formal probate documents have arrived, obtain advice promptly. Informal discussions should not be assumed to suspend a procedural deadline.
2. Preserve the Documents and Estate Assets
Locate the original will and record who holds it. Keep earlier wills, drafts, correspondence and relevant messages in their original form.
Ask the will drafter to preserve the file. Identify the witnesses and other people with direct knowledge of the instructions or signing, without encouraging anyone to adopt a shared account.
Continue taking appropriate steps to safeguard estate property. Obtain advice before an irreversible distribution where validity is disputed.
3. Ask What Is Actually Being Alleged
A focused initial enquiry should establish:
- Which will or provision is disputed.
- The alleged ground of invalidity.
- The events, dates and people relied upon.
- What supporting documents or witnesses have been identified.
- What further information is sought.
- Whether the person intends to enter a caveat or begin proceedings.
The purpose is to clarify the issue before entering into an argumentative exchange.
What Grounds Can Put a Will’s Validity in Issue?
Due Execution
Was the will signed and witnessed in accordance with the applicable formal requirements?
The executor should preserve the original document and identify who was present, what each witness saw and how the signing took place. A concern about execution needs assessment against the relevant requirements, rather than assumptions based on the document’s appearance.
Testamentary Capacity
Did the deceased have the capacity required to make the will at the relevant time?
The enquiry should focus on their understanding and the circumstances surrounding the instructions and execution. Medical records, the drafting file and observations from people who saw the deceased may all be relevant. A diagnosis or a general statement that someone was “confused” should not substitute for examining the applicable legal test and evidence.
Knowledge and Approval
Did the deceased understand and approve the contents of the will?
Relevant enquiries may include how instructions were obtained, how the document was explained, whether it was read over, and whether communication or language difficulties required particular arrangements.
Undue Influence
Was the will the result of coercion rather than the deceased’s free decision?
In will-validity disputes, undue influence is not presumed merely from a close relationship or an opportunity to influence. The person alleging it must prove coercion on the balance of probabilities. Evidence may be circumstantial; the absence of a witness to pressure does not settle the issue.
Fraud, Forgery and Fraudulent Calumny
These are serious allegations requiring careful identification and investigation.
Forgery may concern whether a signature or document is genuine. Fraudulent calumny concerns dishonest false statements about another person that are alleged to have caused the deceased to exclude them or reduce their inheritance. The executor should preserve relevant material and obtain specialist advice before making accusations or attempting to determine the allegation personally.
In court proceedings, CPR 57.7 requires particularised allegations concerning execution, capacity, knowledge and approval, undue influence and fraud. Different grounds involve different evidential questions; they should not be treated as interchangeable labels.
What Is a Larke v Nugus Enquiry?
A Larke v Nugus enquiry seeks information from the will drafter about the circumstances in which the will was prepared and executed.
Depending on the concerns raised, it may address:
- How and from whom instructions were received.
- Who attended meetings.
- What was recorded about the deceased’s understanding.
- How changes from an earlier will were explained.
- How the contents were checked or explained.
- What occurred at execution.
The response may clarify the dispute and help the parties assess whether further investigation is justified.
It is not a court ruling on validity or an automatic entitlement to every document. Disclosure requires consideration of the request, confidentiality, privilege and the authority of those involved. An executor should obtain advice before authorising blanket disclosure or refusing all information.
Does the Executor Have to Defend the Will?
The executor should not assume that every allegation requires an immediate defence funded by the estate.
The appropriate position depends on the dispute, the available evidence, the executor’s involvement and any personal interest in the outcome. An executor who is also a beneficiary should distinguish their administrative responsibilities from their personal interest in receiving an inheritance.
If the executor helped arrange the will, witnessed relevant events or is accused of influencing the deceased, independent advice is particularly important.
Before committing estate funds to a contested position, obtain advice about the executor’s role, authority and potential costs exposure.
Does a Challenge Stop Probate or Administration?
An objection in correspondence is different from a caveat or a court order. Establish what formal steps have actually been taken.
If a caveat is in place, the executor should understand its basis before deciding whether to serve a warning. Read A Caveat Has Been Entered — What Should an Executor Do?
If a warning has already been served, use the separate Caveat Warning response guide.
Preserving assets and records remains important while the position is assessed. Whether other administrative steps can continue depends on the Grant position, the nature of the challenge and any applicable restrictions.
What if the Complaint Is Really About Financial Provision?
“The will is invalid” and “the will does not provide enough for me” raise different questions.
A person seeking financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 may accept that the will is valid. Conversely, a person may raise both financial provision and validity concerns.
Identify each issue separately. Do not assume that the time limits or procedures governing one type of claim apply to the other.
Read: Inheritance Act Claim Threatened — What Should an Executor Do?