Probate disputes: When is a child not a child? The High Court decides in this complicated trust fund battle

Siblings at loggerheads over a £14.5m trust fund have been ordered to share it after an appeal judge ruled that whilst they may not be blood brothers, their father thought of them both as his children.

Stuart Marcus, a wealthy businessman, died in 2020 unaware that Edward, who he’d brought up as his son, was actually the product of a brief affair his wife had with another man decades earlier.

However, when his biological son, Jonathan, found this out in 2023, he tried to have Edward removed as a beneficiary of the family trust arguing his half-brother wasn’t related to Stuart at all and therefore not entitled to a penny.

The High Court didn’t agree and neither did the appeal court with Mr Justice Mann confirming: “Settlement was intended to operate in the real world, and in that real world – Stuart’s real world in particular – Edward was Stuart’s child.”

Navigating inheritance disputes is complicated, particularly when complex family trusts are involved, and early legal advice is essential. Wards Solicitors’ highly experienced Contentious Trusts and Probate Team can guide you through everything you need to know whether you are bringing or defending a claim.

What is the background to this siblings inheritance battle?

Stuart Marcus and his wife, Patricia, had two sons, Edward and Jonathan, both of whom worked in the extremely successful family games business.

As part of his estate planning, Stuart Marcus placed shares in his companies in a discretionary trust in favour of his ‘children and remoter issue’ (which generally, in legal terms, means any future grandchildren and great grandchildren).

Although Patricia confided in Edward some years ago that Stuart was not his biological father, Jonathan didn’t find this out until after his father’s death at a time when the siblings’ relationship was becoming increasingly difficult.

What did the courts decide in this trust fund dispute?

Jonathan decided to take his dispute to the High Court arguing that Edward should not be entitled to any of the trust assets on the basis that he wasn’t Stuart’s biological child.

The High Court, despite DNA evidence proving Edward was not Stuart’s son, as Patricia had confirmed, ruled he could still benefit from the trust on the basis that Stuart wanted his ‘children’ to share it.

Jonathan appealed this decision, but Mr Justice Mann agreed with the first judgement highlighting how Stuart had brought Edward up as his son, thought of him as his son and how there was no reason for him to have treated the brothers differently.

What are the implications of this inheritance battle?

In the legal world, the word ‘children’ is generally understood to refer to biological children and not stepchildren.

However, in this case, it was clear to both judges that Stuart’s use of the word ‘children’ clearly referred to both Edward and Jonathan and that his intention was that they should be treated exactly the same.

Courts will always try to adhere to what the person who set up the trust really wanted. As far as Stuart knew, Edward was his son, born within his marriage to Patricia with his name on the birth certificate as father. He died believing Edward was his biological son.

What this case clearly illustrates  – especially in a world where blended families are increasingly common – is the importance of careful wording when drafting Wills and trusts to minimise the chance of a dispute later.

Get in touch

If you want to contest or defend an inheritance, please contact Wards Solicitors’ Contentious Trusts and Probate Team.

Our lawyers are members of the Association of Contentious Trusts and Probate Specialists (ACTAPS), the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP), The Association of Lifetime Lawyers (previously Solicitors for the Elderly) and the Law Society’s Probate Panel. All demand an elevated level of expertise and up to date knowledge from their members.

Wards Solicitors has recently been named Regional Law Firm of the Year by Bristol Law Society and our Wills, Probate and Mental Capacity team has scooped the Devon and Somerset Law Society’s Private Client Team of the Year.

We are also praised by the Legal 500 Guide 2025 for our extensive probate disputes presence across the South West advising on contentious estate administration matters, Court of Protection issues and challenges to the validity of Wills with a large roster of clients.