Most people assume that once a will is written, its terms are final. But the law can sometimes step in if a will leaves someone without the financial support they reasonably need. That’s exactly what happened in the recent case of Isaacs v Green (2025).
The background
Sybil Isaacs died in 2013. Her will, made in 2006, left her estate equally to her two daughters, Ruth and Susan, and excluded her son David entirely.
At the time of his mother’s death, David was 74 and in poor health with limited income. He had moved back into the family home 2 years earlier to help care for his mother with his sister Ruth.
When their mother died, David and Ruth stayed on in the property rent-free, paying only the outgoings for the property.
The estate was modest by London standards — a house worth £425,000 and other assets of £165,000 at the date of death.
David brought a claim against the estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, asking initially for a sum of £265,000 but later, asked for a 1/3 share of the estate.
The law
Under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, certain people — including adult children and stepchildren — can ask the court for “reasonable financial provision” if a will (or intestacy) fails to provide it.
The court looks at the individual’s needs when deciding the outcome, meaning things like secure housing, care needs, and basic living costs are taken into consideration. It’s not about fairness or equal shares.
The arguments
David’s position: He argued that he had nowhere else to live and couldn’t afford to rent or buy.
He claimed his mother excluded him from her 2006 will, fearing that his wife might claim part of his inheritance if they divorced. David had been included in his mother’s earlier wills.
David’s divorce was finalised in 2008. It’s likely that Sybil lost capacity to change her will by 2011 – before David moved in to care for her.
Ruth’s support: Ruth agreed with David that financial provision should have been made for him.
Susan’s opposition: Living in the US with serious health issues, Susan opposed David’s claim, fearing her own inheritance would be reduced, leaving her without sufficient funds to cover her own health and care needs. She claimed that her mother and brother had had a poor relationship, which is why he was excluded from the 2006 will.
The court’s decision
It was decided that Sybil’s will failed to make reasonable provision for David.
The estate was divided as follows:
- David – 25% (approx. £150,000)
- Ruth – 37.5% (approx. £225,000)
- Susan – 37.5%
Susan was also ordered to pay 75% of David’s legal costs.
The bigger picture
- This case highlights several important truths:
Estate disputes are highly fact dependent. Sybil’s financial support for David before her death (allowing him to live rent-free) was a key factor. - Court proceedings are costly and stressful. The case took years to resolve, incurred significant legal fees, and strained family relationships.
- Estate disputes are becoming more common, driven by:
1. Rising asset values — there’s more at stake.
2. Increased cost of living — people are more reliant on expected inheritances.
3. Complex family structures — blended families and estrangements complicate expectations.
4. Outdated or absent wills — failing to reflect current relationships and financial needs.
Final thought
The lesson from Isaacs v Green is clear: while the law can correct unfair wills, relying on litigation after death is a slow, expensive and emotionally draining process.
The best protection is a well-considered, professionally drafted will, which is reviewed regularly, as circumstances can change. This ensures your wishes are clear, your loved ones are protected, and the risk of costly disputes is reduced.
This case is an example of how important it is to consult a solicitor when updating a will. If Sybil’s intention in 2006 was to protect David’s inheritance during his divorce, a solicitor would likely have recommended using a trust rather than excluding him entirely. This could have preserved her intentions whilst avoiding the complications that arose when she lost capacity to amend her will later.
If this article has got you thinking about your own will, our Tax, Trusts and Succession team will be happy to help you with any queries you may have. Get in touch with them by clicking here. If you have found yourself in David's position and you wish to contest the will of a family member, our Commercial Litigation team can provide you with guidance. Click here to get in touch with them.
