CLOSE SEARCH
We acted for a client in a family property dispute arising from the breach of a formal written agreement entered into following the death of his mother. The dispute concerned the failure of the client’s brother and sister-in-law to pay the balance due for the purchase of the client’s inherited share of the family property.
Our approach focused on enforcing the terms of the written Deed, challenging the Defendants’ inconsistent allegations that the agreement had been replaced by a later oral arrangement, and strategically preparing the matter for trial when settlement proved impossible.
Following contested proceedings and a full trial, the Court found entirely in our client’s favour. Judgment was awarded for the outstanding sum, together with interest and full recovery of legal costs.
The property at the centre of the dispute had been owned solely by our client’s late mother and had been her long-term home before she travelled abroad due to illness. She passed away abroad in 2014.
Under the terms of her Will, the property was left equally to her three children: our client, his brother, and their sister.
At the time, the brother and sister-in-law were residing at the property and wished to remain there permanently. As our client and his sister already had homes elsewhere, the parties agreed that the brother and sister-in-law would purchase their respective one-third interests in the property.
Separate written agreements were prepared by a solicitor for our client and his sister. Our client’s agreement, executed as a Deed in September 2015, provided that the Defendants would pay him £108,000 in two instalments:
£50,000 upon registration of the property into the Defendants’ joint names or by 31 December 2015; and
A second instalment of £58,000 thereafter.
While the first payment was made, the second instalment was never paid, leading to the claim.
The Defendants later alleged that the written agreement had been superseded by a separate oral agreement and further claimed that our client owed them £58,000 relating to financial assistance allegedly provided to the deceased mother. These allegations were strongly disputed by our client.
This matter raised several key legal and strategic issues:
The central legal issue was whether the written Deed remained binding and enforceable, or whether it had allegedly been replaced by a later oral agreement as claimed by the Defendants.
From the outset, the Defendants’ position lacked consistency. Their explanations as to why the outstanding sum was allegedly not payable changed repeatedly throughout the proceedings, and their pleaded case contained significant contradictions.
We pursued a robust litigation strategy focused on:
Upholding the enforceability of the written Deed;
Demonstrating the absence of credible evidence supporting the alleged oral agreement;
Challenging inconsistencies in the Defendants’ pleadings and witness evidence; and
Preparing detailed documentary and witness evidence for trial.
Settlement discussions were explored but proved unsuccessful due to the highly personal and hostile nature of the family dispute.
At trial, careful preparation and effective cross-examination exposed substantial inconsistencies in the Defendants’ evidence, including contradictions between their oral testimony and pleaded case, as well as inconsistencies between each Defendant’s account.
Our client succeeded in full at trial.
The Court rejected the Defendants’ arguments and upheld the terms of the written Deed. Judgment was entered in favour of our client for:
The outstanding £58,000;
Interest on the unpaid amount; and
Full recovery of legal costs.
The decision brought finality to a long-running and emotionally charged family dispute while securing our client’s contractual entitlement under the agreement.
Properly drafted written agreements remain critical in family property and inheritance arrangements.
Courts are reluctant to disregard formal written agreements without clear and credible evidence.
Allegations of subsequent oral agreements are closely scrutinised, particularly where parties provide inconsistent evidence.
Early strategic applications can help narrow issues and strengthen a client’s litigation position, even where a matter proceeds to trial. Thorough preparation and careful cross-examination are often decisive in disputes turning on witness credibility.
Get in touch
If you would like to speak with a member of the team you can contact us on:
