There continues to be a rise in will validity challenges involving allegations that an individual was unduly influenced to change the terms of their will. Such cases often involve the elderly or vulnerable, who may be more susceptible to influence, or someone abusing a position of trust to coerce an individual to write a will on terms that they otherwise would not have. This generally results in the person who exerted the influence (or someone close to them) benefitting significantly under the terms of the will.
Evidence of undue influence can be difficult to find, because it invariably happens behind closed doors, involves someone close to the person making a will, and the primary witness is deceased. This can make it difficult to prove that undue influence has occurred, particularly because, given the serious nature of the allegation, there is a high threshold in these types of claims. The party claiming undue influence must demonstrate that the influencing party coerced the person making the will into doing so, thereby overriding their own free will or volition. Persuasion is not enough.
There have been a number of recent cases involving allegations of undue influence, including the Court of Appeal case of Rea v Rea [2024].
Rea v Rea involved a will validity challenge based on allegations that a daughter had coerced her late mother into making a will that did not reflect her true testamentary intentions. The will, which left most of the mother’s estate – including the family home – to the daughter in question, had replaced one made 30 years earlier (which divided the estate equally between all of the testator’s children, the daughter and three sons).
At first instance, the High Court Judge determined that the three sons had established undue influence on the part of the daughter, taking into account: the frailty and vulnerability of the mother at the time the will was made; that the mother was dependant on the daughter; that the new will was made shortly after the sons stopped helping with her care; that the daughter had arranged the solicitor’s appointment (to make the will) and was present throughout a meeting; that there were serious concerns about the mother’s reasons for leaving her home to the daughter; and that no one was aware of the new will until the mother died.
However, the Court of Appeal found that the evidence did not support a finding of undue influence. The Court found that undue influence was no more likely than an alternative hypothesis, for example, that the mother had decided to make a new will (and the fact that the daughter may have encouraged her to do so was not a bar to this).
These cases are incredibly fact specific and evidence is crucial, as can be seen in the example of Rea v Rea.
As a result of the difficulty of bringing successful claims based on undue influence, concerns have been raised that the current law does not adequately protect vulnerable people from financial abuse. On 16 May 2025, the Law Commission published recommendations to reform the law relating to wills; this included a recommendation that it “should” be possible for the court to “infer” that a will (or any disposition in it) was brought about by undue influence where there is “evidence which provides reasonable grounds to suspect it”. This is not law yet; however, if the recommendation is taken forward, the inference may arise where there is evidence which provides reasonable ground to suspect undue influence, considering in particular, any relationship of influence between the person and the testator, their conduct in respect of making the will, the circumstances in which the will is made, and any other relevant factors.
If the law is changed, evidence will be required in order for an inference of undue influence to arise, so it will still be important for the merits of any claim to be assessed and evidence collated at an early stage when considering advancing a claim on this basis.
Further information
If you have any questions, please contact Cally Brosnan in our Dispute Resolution team.
About the author
Cally is an Associate who specialises in trust, estate and Court of Protection disputes. Her experience in the field of estate disputes includes challenges to the validity of wills (including claims based on a lack of testamentary capacity, want of knowledge and approval, fraud, forgery and undue influence), and claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.
Join the conversation
