header-logo header-logo

Personal representatives: Sending on the substitutes

18 June 2021 / Nathan Wells
Issue: 7937 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail
51263
Nathan Wells examines the removal & replacement of personal representatives
  • Claims under section 50 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 for the removal of personal representatives: procedure and evidence.

Section 50 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 (AJA 1985) gives the High Court jurisdiction to remove or replace personal representatives where this is necessary in the interests of the welfare of the beneficiaries and the proper administration of the estate.

The jurisdiction has proved to be a fecund source of litigation and the sphere of operation of AJA 1985, s 50 was increased by the decision in Goodman v Goodman [2013] EWHC 758 (Ch), where Newey J confirmed that it could be employed to seek the removal of a named executor (though not a potential administrator) who had not yet obtained a grant of probate.

There was, initially, a striking dearth of reported authority on the operation of the section. Fortunately, that situation has been remedied in recent years and there is a growing body of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll