header-logo header-logo

Success story? A case with far-reaching inheritance implications

22 March 2024 / Andrew Wilkinson
Issue: 8064 / Categories: Features , Profession , Wills & Probate , Family
printer mail-detail
164814
While we await the Supreme Court judgment in Hirachand v Hirachand, Andrew Wilkinson analyses the case and its implications on inheritance—for lawyers, families and the third sector
  • The case of Hirachand v Hirachand turns on the specific issue of the success fee. The final judgment could reshape the funding of inheritance disputes, with far-reaching repercussions.

On the 18 January 2024, the Supreme Court heard arguments in the case of Hirachand v Hirachand, one of very few cases ever to be heard by the Supreme Court in relation to claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The decision, which we are still awaiting at the date of writing, is significant for a large number of cases and could lead to a broader change in the costs regime surrounding claims under the Act.

Hirachand v Hirachand has been years in the making, arising from a 2020 ruling in an inheritance dispute over the will of Navinchandra Hirachand between Nalini, his wife, and Sheila,

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll