Challenging A Will Years After Death

A Will sets out what should happen to a person’s assets after they die. Whilst most estates are administered without dispute, some Wills are challenged by disappointed relatives or beneficiaries. Such challenges are made on the basis that the Will is invalid, due to a lack of proper execution, or on the basis that the document does not truly reflect the deceased’s wishes. These disputes often arise shortly after death, but in some cases, claims are brought many years later.

Will challenges usually focus on questions such as:

Although there is no strict deadline for challenging a Will in England and Wales, delay can have serious consequences. Memories fade, key witnesses may no longer be available, and for this reason, Courts become understandably cautious when being asked to unravel events that occurred many years ago. The recent case illustrates just how difficult these late challenges can be.

In this case, the Court was asked to decide which of two Wills represented the Deceased’s true wishes. The deceased died in 2014, having made a Will in 2010, leaving everything to his younger son, and a later Will in 2011 dividing the estate equally between his two sons and his daughter‑in‑law.

The challenge was not brought until 2024, being ten years after the Deceased’s death. The Claimant argued that the 2011 Will should be declared invalid because the Deceased did not understand or approve its contents and because it had been procured by the undue influence of the Defendant.

Knowledge and approval: did the deceased understand the Will?

For a Will to be valid, the person making it must understand what it contains and approve its effect. In this case, the Claimant argued that the Deceased could not read English and that there was no proper evidence that the 2011 Will had been explained/translated to him in Punjabi.

The Court carefully examined the evidence. Whilst the solicitor who prepared the Will could not remember the specific meeting, she gave evidence about her usual practice of reading Wills aloud to Punjabi‑speaking clients. Importantly, the judge looked beyond memory alone and placed significant weight on surrounding documents and the Claimant’s own conduct after death. The Claimant had previously acted in ways consistent with the 2011 Will being valid, including relying on it during proceedings concerning property in India.

Against that background, the court concluded that the Deceased did understand and approve the 2011 Will.

Undue influence: was the Will the result of pressure?

Undue influence is one of the hardest grounds to prove in a Will dispute. It requires proof of actual coercion, not merely persuasion or family tension. The Claimant relied on a troubled family history and earlier allegations of violence to argue that the Deceased must have been pressured into changing his Will.

However, the Court found no direct evidence of coercion at the time the 2011 Will was made. Instead, the evidence suggested that relationships had improved and that the Deceased had acted of his own free will. Again, the long passage of time worked against the claim as witnesses’ recollections were unreliable, and the Court preferred contemporaneous records over memories recalled years later.

The key lesson: delay creates serious obstacles

Although English law does not impose a strict limitation period for challenging a Will, the above case shows that delay can be fatal to a claim. The longer a claimant waits, the harder it becomes to prove wrongdoing. Documents may be lost, solicitors may no longer have records, and the Court will approach recollections with caution.

Perhaps most damaging of all is that a claimant’s own past actions may contradict their later allegations. Courts expect challenges to be brought promptly. If there are concerns about a Will, early advice and decisive action are crucial because once many years have passed, even serious allegations may simply be impossible to prove.