When co-executors can’t get along: lessons from Key v Key

Being named as an executor in a parent’s will is a responsibility many people take on with family members. But what happens when the executors simply can’t work together? A recent High Court case, Key v Key [2026] EWHC 2098 (Ch), shows how the court may step in.

What happened?

Grace Key died in 2022, leaving her estate of approximately £1.9million to her two children, Laura and Richard as set out in her Will. She named them both joint executors and as such, they were, inter alia, responsible for collecting her assets, paying her debts and tax, and distributing the estate.

The siblings were estranged and quickly fell out. They disagreed about the funeral, access to their mother’s house and her paperwork, and whether the house should be sold or let. Richard moved into the property without Laura’s agreement and lodged a caveat, a formal objection that holds up the probate process. The property remained unsold for years, mortgage arrears built up and an attempt at mediation failed.

Meanwhile, unpaid inheritance tax was attracting interest of around £118 a day, and the siblings had already spent more than £260,000 on legal costs between them.

Laura made an application under section 50 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 to the court to remove them both as executors and appoint an independent professional instead.

What did the court decide?

The court agreed and removed both siblings as executors. A professional trust company was appointed to complete the administration of the estate.

The court made it clear that neither side was blameless and both had contributed to the delay. Richard had shut Laura out and acted unreasonably at times, and his caveat was not justified. Laura had repeatedly failed to engage and argued Richard moved into the property without consent, the reality being she would have never consented. In addition, most of Laura’s allegations against Richard were unsupported by evidence.

The deciding factor was not who was at fault. It was that the relationship was so full of conflict and mistrust that there was no realistic prospect of the siblings working together, and the estate was suffering as a result.

The court also gave guidance to the new administrator in respect of the property. Richard could be allowed to buy the property at a fair valuation. Because he had lived there, it may be fair to deduct an amount from his share of the estate in place of rent, while giving him credit for money he properly spent maintaining the property.

Key takeaways

·  Wrongdoing is not essential. The court can remove executors when wrong doing has not been proven if their relationship has broken down to the extent that the proper administration of the estate is not being dealt with =.

·  Delay costs money. Disputes can mean tax interest and legal fees eat into the inheritance everyone is waiting for.

·  Living in an estate property has consequences. A beneficiary who lives in a property belonging to the estate may have to account for the benefit, even if being there helped protect it.

·  Unproven allegations can backfire. Making accusations you cannot support with evidence is unlikely to help your case and may add to costs.

· Think carefully when making a will. Ifyour children do not get on, naming them as joint executors may cause problems when you pass. An independent or professional executor could be a more suitable choice.

If you are an executor in a dispute, or worried about how an estate is being handled, please get in touch with the Wills & Probate Disputes Team at Leathes Prior via email at info@leathesprior.co.uk or by telephone at 01603 610911.

‍