This guide is maintained as a current resource for September 2026 and covers only the laws of England and Wales. Information is for general guidance, not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.
Explore the recognised legal grounds for contesting a will in England and Wales, including lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, fraud, improper execution, lack of knowledge and approval, and related issues, with clear explanations of legal principles and practical context.
A will sets out how a person's estate is to be distributed after death. In England and Wales, the law recognises that not all wills will be valid or reflect the genuine intentions of the person who made them (the testator). There are specific legal grounds on which a will can be contested. These are distinct from personal dissatisfaction with how an estate is divided. To succeed, a claimant must show that one or more recognised legal conditions apply. This article explains the key grounds for contesting a will, the legal principles involved, and what they mean in practical terms.
What Does It Mean to Contest a Will?
Contesting a will means initiating a formal dispute about the validity or content of a will. The dispute is usually resolved in the civil courts, and the person bringing the claim must identify a recognised legal ground - for example, that the will was not validly executed or that the testator lacked mental capacity. Without an established legal basis, courts are unlikely to intervene.
Ground 1: Lack of Testamentary Capacity
One of the most common legal grounds is that the testator did not have testamentary capacity when the will was made. Under long‑standing English case law (notably Banks v Goodfellow), a testator must:
- Understand the nature and effect of making a will;
- Recognise the extent of their property;
- Appreciate the claims of people who might reasonably be expected to benefit; and
- Be free from any mental disorder that distorts their decision‑making.
If the testator lacked capacity - because of dementia, Alzheimer's, delirium or other cognitive impairment - the will may be invalid. Medical records and expert opinions are often central to these claims.
Ground 2: Lack of Knowledge and Approval
Even if a testator had mental capacity, they must know and approve the contents of the will at the time of execution. This is a separate concept from capacity: it focuses on whether the testator understood what they were signing. Circumstances that may raise suspicion include unusual provisions that the testator could not reasonably be expected to know, the involvement of a beneficiary in drafting the will, or errors in the document.
The law presumes that a will properly signed and witnessed was known and approved by the testator, but this presumption can be displaced by evidence that suggests otherwise.
Ground 3: Undue Influence or Duress
A will must reflect the free, independent wishes of the testator. If someone exerted pressure, coercion or manipulation significant enough to overpower the testator's free will, this is known as undue influence. Simple persuasion or discussion with the testator is generally not enough; the influence must be such that it overbore the testator's independent judgment.
Undue influence claims are fact‑sensitive and often difficult to prove because the testator is no longer alive to give evidence. Courts look at indicators such as isolation of the testator, involvement of a beneficiary in drafting the will, or evidence of coercive conduct.
Ground 4: Fraud or Forgery
A will can be contested if it was forged or procured by fraud. Forgery occurs when a document purporting to be a will is created or signed without the testator's knowledge or consent. Fraud may also involve falsified documents, concealed wills, or misrepresentation about the contents of the document. Allegations of forgery or fraud require strong evidence, such as forensic document analysis.
Ground 5: Lack of Valid Execution
The Wills Act 1837 sets strict formal requirements for a will to be valid:
- The document must be in writing;
- The testator must sign it with the intention that the signature gives effect to the will;
- The signature must be made or acknowledged in the presence of at least two independent witnesses; and
- Each witness must sign the will in the presence of the testator.
If any of these formalities are not met, the will may be invalid. This ground is sometimes called lack of due execution or want of due execution.
Ground 6: Rectification or Construction Claims
A will may be contested if it does not accurately reflect the testator's instructions because of a drafting error. Under judicial principles, the court has limited power to rectify a will so that it carries out the testator's intentions as originally intended. This is not the same as challenging validity, but it can be a basis for dispute where clerical errors or misunderstandings by the draftsman have distorted the testator's actual wishes.
Ground 7: Claims Under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
Although not a ground for invalidating a will, it is important to recognise that some disputes are brought under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. These claims assert that the will did not make reasonable financial provision for certain family members or dependants, such as a spouse, civil partner, cohabitee of at least two years, child or financially dependent person. The remedy is not to declare the will invalid but to adjust the distribution to provide appropriate financial provision.
Distinguishing Between Grounds
It is important to distinguish between grounds for invalidity and provision claims:
- Invalidity grounds focus on legal defects in how the will was made or executed. If successful, the will may be set aside entirely or in part.
- Provision claims under the 1975 Act do not challenge validity but ask the court to order appropriate provision where the will has left an eligible claimant without adequate support.
Only a recognised legal ground can form the basis of a challenge; dissatisfaction with the distribution alone is not sufficient without an accompanying legal basis.
Practical Considerations
Claims based on testamentary capacity, undue influence, fraud or forgery often require detailed evidence, including medical records, witness statements, correspondence and expert reports. The burden of proof may shift depending on the circumstances: for example, in capacity claims, once a claimant raises a real issue, the burden may shift to those defending the will to prove capacity.
Early legal advice is essential, as evidence deteriorates with time and estates may be distributed once probate is granted. In some cases, parties may register a caveat to prevent grant of probate while issues are investigated. Failure to act promptly can significantly hinder a challenge.
Key Takeaways
Contesting a will in England and Wales requires clear legal grounds. The main recognised bases are:
- Lack of testamentary capacity, where the testator did not understand what they were doing;
- Lack of knowledge and approval, indicating the testator did not know or approve the contents;
- Undue influence, where coercion affected the will;
- Fraud or forgery, involving falsified or tampered documents;
- Lack of valid execution, failing to comply with formal legal requirements; and
- Rectification or construction issues, where errors misrepresent the testator's intentions.
- Claims under the Inheritance Act 1975 provide a separate route for those left without reasonable provision.
Understanding these grounds and their requirements is vital before pursuing court proceedings, and early engagement with expert advisors can help preserve evidence and evaluate the strength of a claim.
