Promised inheritances
Guest v Guest: a promised inheritance and detrimental reliance
A promise of an inheritance may raise a property claim where a person reasonably relied on it to their detriment. The appropriate remedy is a separate question.
The issue and decision
A son worked on the family farm for many years for limited reward in reliance on inheritance assurances. The Supreme Court allowed the parents’ appeal in part on the remedy. The majority offered alternatives involving a trust arrangement or an immediate payment discounted to reflect early receipt.
Why it matters
The majority treated fulfilment of the promise as a starting point for addressing unconscionability, with adjustments where necessary to achieve justice. The decision does not mean every promise leads to immediate payment of the full expected inheritance.
What evidence may help
Identify what was promised, who said it, when it was said, how the claimant relied on it and what disadvantage followed. This is a different inquiry from the financial-provision test under the 1975 Act.
This is a short explanation of the decision, not a substitute for the judgment. The official case page links to the full judgment. Application to a different case depends on its facts and the applicable law.
England and Wales. Sources checked 15 September 2026. General information, not advice on your circumstances. Fees, forms and the law can change; check the linked official source before acting. Other jurisdictions have different rules.