Ugolor v Ugolor [2026] EWHC 745 (Ch)

The High Court handed down its judgment in Ugolor v Ugolor [2026] EWHC 745 (Ch) on 27 March 2026. Priya Wagjiani appeared as sole counsel for the Claimants.

The claim concerned a challenge to the validity of a purported homemade will under which the First Defendant, one of the deceased’s children, was the principal beneficiary. The Claimants advanced the case on the grounds that the deceased lacked testamentary capacity, did not know and approve of the contents of the will and/or she was subject to undue influence.

The First Defendant was debarred from defending the proceedings as a result of significant and persistent non-compliance with court orders. However, as this was a probate claim, the court had to perform a quasi-inquisitorial role. The Defendant’s debarring did not result in judgment by default. Rather, the judge was required to put himself in the position of the First Defendant and consider in his own mind the arguments that might be put forward by him.

The Claimants succeeded in setting aside the purported will on the ground of want of knowledge and approval. The court found that the surrounding circumstances, particularly the manner in which the will was prepared and executed, were such as to excite the court’s suspicion. The First Defendant was unable to dispel those suspicions and the will could not be upheld. The estate falls to be distributed in accordance with the intestacy rules.

This decision is a recent example of a contentious probate dispute, illustrating the operation of the doctrine of knowledge and approval in suspicious circumstances. It also provides useful clarification on the court’s role in probate proceedings where a defendant is debarred from participation.