CONTESTING A WILL WITH WILLCLAIM SOLICITORS NO WIN NO FEE SPECIALISTS – A SUMMARY OF THE RECENT CASE OF “Natthachai v Burrage and Burrage [2025] EWHC 568 (Ch)”

23 March 2025 11:10 pm

Will claim Solicitors, specialist no win no fee will dispute and will contest Solicitors, explain the key findings in “Natthachai v Burrage and Burrage”

Contesting a Will: The Case of Natthachai v Burrage and Burrage [2025] EWHC 568 (Ch)

In one of the more complex recent will disputes, the High Court was asked to decide on an application for security for costs in the ongoing inheritance dispute between Kanokporn Natthachai and the sons of the late Roger Burrage. The case raises important issues for anyone considering contesting a will, particularly where overseas assets and claims of financial dependency are involved.

For a link to the decision, please see:

Natthachai v Burrage & Anor [2025] EWHC 568 (Ch) (17 March 2

The Background: An Inheritance Dispute Across Continents

Roger Burrage tragically died by suicide in January 2023. Under his English will, dated 2006, his entire estate was left to his sons, Simon and David Burrage—the defendants in this case. However, Kanokporn Natthachai, who claims to have been in a long-term relationship with the deceased, has launched a claim, leading to a full-scale will contest.

Ms Natthachai argues that she is entitled to a share of the inheritance based on several grounds, including:

A claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 as a person maintained by the deceased;
Repayment of a loan of nearly £194,000;
A proprietary estoppel claim for a beneficial interest in the estate;
An application to remove the defendants as executors and instead grant her letters of administration.

She asserts that she should receive one-third of the estate, which is valued at just over £420,000 in England, though there are additional contested assets in Thailand and possibly Singapore.

Disputing an Inheritance When You’re Abroad

This will dispute carries an additional complication: Ms Natthachai is based in Thailand. This triggered the defendants’ request for security for costs—a legal mechanism that allows a court to order an overseas claimant to pay money upfront, in case they lose the case and are required to cover the other side’s legal costs.

The core of the defendants’ argument was that Ms Natthachai’s foreign residence could make it difficult to enforce a costs order, should they win. This kind of situation is not uncommon when disputing a will with cross-border elements.

Will Contest or Financial Stalemate?

Initially, Ms Natthachai resisted the application, arguing that she could not afford to pay more than £30,000 in security. Her legal team claimed that asking for more would effectively “stifle” her ability to bring the case at all—a critical concern in will claim cases where financial vulnerability is often central to the dispute.

However, Master Clark found that the claimant’s evidence was not “full, frank, and unequivocal.” Her financial statements were incomplete, and there were inconsistencies in her explanations of how she was funding the case. This lack of transparency undermined her position.

Despite this, the Court acknowledged that her claim had merit and directed that £30,000 was the minimum acceptable figure for initial security. The full amount of security will be revisited at the next case management hearing.

Lessons from This Will Claim Case

For anyone thinking about contesting a will—especially from abroad—this case underscores some important points:

1. Transparency matters: If you’re making a claim involving financial need, your evidence must be clear and complete. We emphasized the importance of providing an honest account to the Court in our earlier blog as follows:
Master Your Will Dispute or Will Contest Claim: Top 10 Tips for Success | WillClaim

2. Overseas claimants may be required to provide security: Courts are wary about enforcing cost orders across borders, especially in complex inheritance disputes.

3. Inheritance Act claims require focus: The strength of a claim under the 1975 Act often hinges on proving financial dependency and need. Ms Natthachai’s claims, if properly evidenced, may still carry weight at trial.

Conclusion

This case is a reminder that disputing an inheritance is rarely straightforward. Whether you’re facing a will dispute over lack of provision or trying to remove executors, it’s essential to prepare carefully and anticipate legal hurdles like security for costs. For those considering a will contest, particularly under the Inheritance Act, the facts of Natthachai v Burrage and Burrage offer a valuable look into how the courts approach cross-border and financially complex will claims.

If you consider any of these facts and matters are of interest, are likely to apply to you, or you would like to ask us for more information about our no win no fee arrangement, or you simply want us to assess your claim, then please do not hesitate to contact us for a confidential no strings chat and/or visit us at www.willclaim.com.

We provide details about our no win no fee arrangements at https://www.willclaim.com/no-win-no-fee/.