Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court dismissed a strike-out and summary judgment application in a probate dispute over whether a 2021 will was valid and whether earlier Court of Protection findings bound the estate.
MacDougall v Lloyd Philip Thomas & Ors [2026] EWHC 1142 (Ch) (21 May 2026)
High Court probate dispute over Jeanne MacDougall’s 2011 will, capacity, undue influence, ademption, proprietary estoppel, and alleged attorney breaches under an LPA.
The court upheld Jeanne MacDougall’s 2011 will and 2013 codicil, rejected a proprietary estoppel claim, and addressed capacity, undue influence, ademption, and attorney breaches.
Ugolor & Ors v Ugolor & Anor [2026] EWHC 745 (Ch) (27 March 2026)
The High Court refused probate of a disputed will, finding that although capacity was not disproved, knowledge and approval were not established.
Probate claim challenging a homemade will succeeded on knowledge and approval. The court upheld testamentary capacity but found the will invalid and ordered intestacy.
Woolfson v Woolfson & Ors [2026] EWHC 613 (Ch) (20 March 2026)
The High Court struck out a probate and trust claim brought by Karen Woolfson and granted summary judgment for the defendants, admitting the Second June 2018 Will to probate.
Strike-out and summary judgment in a probate dispute over alleged invalid wills, capacity, undue influence, fraud, and trust claims.
Liebenthal v Liebenthal & Ors [2026] EWHC 213 (Ch) (13 February 2026)
Probate application for third-party disclosure from a Beth Din file was dismissed because the documents were not shown to be likely relevant or necessary.
Third-party disclosure was refused in a probate claim because the Beth Din files were not shown to be likely to support the case or be necessary for fair disposal.
The court found that at the time of giving instructions and executing his will, Michael Gwilliam was suffering from an insane delusion or disorder of the mind arising from a mental disease, which was fixed and incapable of contrary persuasion and had a causative effect on his testamentary dispositions, precluding him from properly considering the claims of his daughters. The will was therefore void for want of testamentary capacity. The claim of fraudulent calumny failed because, although Sheila and Joan made statements to Michael about his daughters, they genuinely believed them and were not…
Source excerpt
Explore more
