The High Court has awarded an adult daughter £123,418 from her late father’s estate despite his Will expressly excluding her. The decision in McDaniel v Talbot & Anor [2026] EWHC 928 (Ch) reinforces the limited circumstances in which an adult child can successfully bring a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 ("the 1975 Act"), underlining the importance of keeping wills under review where family circumstances change.
Emma McDaniel brought a successful claim under the 1975 Act against the estate of her father, Mark Talbot.
Mark’s final Will, made in 2014, left his entire estate, valued at approximately £1.57 million, to his wife, Rosemary, and made no provision for Emma, his daughter from a previous relationship. At the time the final Will was prepared, Mark and Emma had not had contact since she was about eight months[PK1.1] old. The Will also contained a declaration explaining that he had not had contact with her for around 20 years.
However, Mark died unexpectedly in 2022 without updating his Will. By that stage, the circumstances had changed considerably. Father and daughter had re-established contact in 2019, their relationship had developed over the following years, and Emma had provided some care for Mark before his death.
The High Court found that the stringent test applicable to adult children under the 1975 Act had been satisfied, and that Emma had established that the Will failed to make reasonable financial provision for her maintenance.
The Law
The 1975 Act provides a limited exception to the principle of testamentary freedom by allowing certain categories of people to ask the court to award them sums from the Estate not otherwise provided for them in the Will. The question is not whether the deceased's Will is fair, but whether, viewed objectively, the Will makes reasonable financial provision to the claimant for their maintenance. For spouses and civil partners, the test is wider, as reasonable financial provision is not limited to what is required for maintenance.
Section 1(1)(c) of the 1975 Act specifies 'a child of the deceased' as one category of claimant who can bring a claim. Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Ilott v Mitson, the court’s focus is narrow: whether the will makes reasonable financial provision for the adult child’s 'maintenance', and this is construed narrowly.
The burden rests on the claimant to establish that an award should be made. In determining whether reasonable financial provision has been made, the court considers a range of factors set out in section 3 of the Act.
But courts have consistently emphasised that claims under the 1975 Act are highly fact-specific.
Why did the claim succeed?
Reconciliation
Mark's Will contained a non-provision declaration explaining that he had not had contact with Emma for around 20 years. However, the Will no longer reflected the reality at the time of death.
Having re-established contact in 2019, Mark and Emma rebuilt their relationship over the following years, during which Emma also provided occasional care for him. As the judge observed, their relationship at the time of Mark's death was "starkly different" from the estrangement described in the Will which had been overtaken by genuine reconciliation.
The judge drew a subtle distinction between moral obligation and what was described as the moral dimension of the claim. Emma’s ‘generosity and care’ towards Mark post reconciliation did not equate to a ‘moral obligation’ owed to her by Mark. However, her conduct, when considered alongside the restored relationship and her financial circumstances, elevated the claim to one with a moral dimension that formed part of the court's overall assessment under the 1975 Act.
Financial Need
Emma's financial circumstances were equally significant.
Emma is the mother of two boys, both of whom have severe learning and physical disabilities, and live full time with Emma and her husband Antony, who each have health challenges of their own. Emma's caring responsibilities substantially limited her ability to work and resulted in modest income. Subsequently, following a detailed review of her financial situation and resources, the judge considered Emma a “necessitous claimant”.
The award of £123,418.47 was calculated to meet maintenance needs rather than to confer a share of the estate, including clearing Emma’s debts and providing a modest financial buffer for everyday expenses and unforeseen costs. The court highlighted the significance of supported figures and financial records to reinforce a claimant’s needs and situation. Importantly, the judge was also satisfied that the award would not compromise the standard of living of the primary beneficiary, Rosemary, who had substantial income and assets of her own.
When Claims by Adult Children Fail:
The decision can be contrasted with the Supreme Court’ decision in Ilott v Mitson where an estranged adult daughter in financial need brought a claim against her mother’s estate. In Ilott, the estrangement was unresolved before death and was consistent with the deceased wishes, emphasising the point whether the Will reflects the true position at the time of death. Despite the fact the claimant succeeded initially, the Supreme Court significantly limited the award, cementing adult children do not have an automatic entitlement to provision.
1975 Act claims brought by adult children remain challenging and rare, but McDaniel v Talbot shows in limited special circumstances, adult children with earning capacity can succeed.
For those preparing or reviewing a will, the decision underlines the importance of ensuring testamentary documents continue to reflect current family relationships and intentions. Updating the Will to account for the change in circumstance could have prevented the need for litigation proceedings.
If you are seeking advice regarding your will and whether it accurately reflects your current circumstance, the private wealth team at BPE would be happy to assist. Alternatively, if you feel you have the grounds to make a claim under the 1975 Act, the Litigation team at BPE are here to help. Please click here for an initial discussion.
