Executors Beware

We often hear complaints from beneficiaries that their executors are not discharging their duties in accordance with their obligations. In 2025, the High Court provided a timely reminder of the scrutiny applied to such executors who fail to progress the administration of an estate.

The decision in Fernandez v Fernandez [2025] EWHC 2373 (Ch) demonstrates the pragmatic approach the Court will adopt when asked to intervene in estate disputes. The decision reflects the Court's firm stance that the interests of beneficiaries are paramount, reinforcing why careful and proactive oversight of estates is essential.

Court intervention in Fernandez arose against the backdrop of a family conflict concerning the administration of two estates and a family trust. The beneficiaries brought a claim against their brother, who had ultimately found himself as the sole executor and trustee. The allegations against the executor involved undue delay and failure in undertaking the proper management of the estate. 

The beneficiaries claim in Fernandez succeeded at first instance, with the Court ordering the removal of the executor and the appointment of a professional trustee. The executor appealed, but the decision was ultimately upheld, and the Court ordered the executor to pay his siblings' legal costs without recourse to the assets of the estate or trust. 

Fernandez demonstrates the Courts' willingness to intervene where the administration of an estate or trust is threatened, even where there is no significant evidence of fault on behalf of the executors. The guiding principles are whether the administration of the estate can be properly conducted and whether the removal of an executor is justified in the best interests of the beneficiaries. 

Fernandez serves as a useful reminder to executors that early legal advice in the face of beneficiary dissatisfaction can be important and, in the right circumstances, stepping aside can prove sensible and prevent adverse cost consequences further down the line. While cases will always be fact specific, a breakdown of trust is clearly reflected in the act of issuing proceedings, which in of itself provides evidence that supports the removal of an executor.

Taking an entrenched approach risks inflaming what might otherwise remain a contained and proportionate dispute. It is common for family relationships to be affected after the death of a loved one, with significant responsibility placed on the executor or administrator. As a result, the actions of executors can become a cause for concern when information is communicated poorly, there are significant delays or the executor acts in a way that misleads and creates suspicions amongst beneficiaries. 

These cases are on the rise; 2025 saw a reported 56% increase in contentious probate disputes. Each case is fact-specific and each must be treated on its merits. It is, however, important that an appropriate strategy is adopted from an early stage, whether that be via voluntary replacement or Court intervention. Either way, it is in the interests of all parties to seek to avoid protracted and costly litigation. 

Looking ahead in 2026, there is a clear expectation that executors should be proactive, manage conflicts where possible and, in appropriate circumstances, step aside to preserve effective estate administration. Should you have concerns with regards to the management of an estate or trust, the contentious probate team at Hunters regularly advise parties on either side of the executor/beneficiary divide and have considerable expertise in navigating these complex and emotionally charged disputes. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.