When Equal Inheritance Is Not Always Fair

Equal inheritance is often seen as fair, easy to explain, and in many cases entirely appropriate. When families are made up of people in similar circumstances, dividing an estate in equal shares reflects what most people would want.

But families are rarely that simple. An equal division can produce an unfair result in practice when it fails to take into account the real differences between people's lives and needs. One child may have already received substantial financial support during the testator's lifetime. Another may have given up years of income to provide care. A surviving spouse may need long-term financial security. A vulnerable beneficiary may need protection rather than an outright gift.

And beyond fairness, there is a legal dimension worth understanding: a Will that treats beneficiaries equally on paper can still be legally vulnerable if it fails to make reasonable financial provision for those who needed it most.

The Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975

The 1975 Act gives certain individuals the right to apply to court where a Will - or the intestacy rules - fails to make reasonable financial provision for them. It is one of the more commonly invoked pieces of legislation in contested estate cases, and equal division does not provide automatic protection against it.

Who can apply?

The right to bring a claim extends to a broad category of people:

• A spouse or civil partner
• A former spouse or civil partner who has not remarried
• A cohabitant who lived with the deceased for at least two years before death
• A child of the deceased (including adult children)
• Any person treated as a child of the family
• Any person who was being financially maintained by the deceased

What does the court consider?

When assessing a claim, the court will look at a range of factors including the financial needs and resources of the applicant and other beneficiaries, the size and nature of the estate, any disabilities, and the obligations the deceased had towards the applicant.

For most applicants, the test is whether the Will provides enough for their day-to-day needs - maintenance. For a spouse or civil partner, the assessment is broader and not limited strictly to maintenance. The key point is this: an equal split may still be legally vulnerable if the outcome it produces is not a reasonable one in the circumstances.

Six Situations Where Equal Is Not Fair

1. Differing financial needs Equal division can be problematic where beneficiaries are in very different financial positions. If one child is financially secure while another has limited income or significant outgoings, an equal share may leave the more vulnerable child without adequate provision. While an adult child has no automatic right to inherit, a court may look unfavourably on a Will that ignores an obvious financial need. A larger share, a housing provision, or a trust arrangement may be more appropriate.
2. Unpaid care A common and often overlooked situation arises when one child has provided long-term care - sacrificing income, career progression, or personal independence to look after the deceased. If the estate is then divided equally, that contribution goes entirely unrecognised. If the carer became financially dependent on the deceased, or had a reasonable expectation of continued support, an equal split may create genuine hardship. A larger share, a right to occupy property, or a structured trust can reflect the reality of what was given.
3. Lifetime gifts Strict equal inheritance at death can actually produce an unequal outcome overall if substantial support was already given to one beneficiary during the testator's lifetime. If one child received significant help - buying a home, starting a business, clearing debts - while another did not, this needs to be reflected in the Will. Adjusting shares, noting gifts in a letter of wishes, or using a discretionary trust are all ways of achieving a fairer overall result. Clear records are essential.
4. Financial dependants A person who was being maintained by the deceased - someone living in their property, or relying on regular financial support - may have a strong basis for a 1975 Act claim if the Will fails to continue some form of provision. An equal share that does not address their ongoing housing or income needs may not reflect the reality of the relationship. Specific provision for housing or maintenance may be needed.
5. Indivisible assets Practical difficulties arise when an estate includes assets that cannot easily be split - a family home, a farm, or a business. Forcing a sale to achieve nominal equality can undermine the entire purpose of the asset and cause significant damage. A fairer outcome often involves allocating specific assets to those best placed to use them, while compensating other beneficiaries through different parts of the estate or through insurance-backed arrangements.
6. Blended families When two people who have each been widowed remarry, one or both may bring in assets that came originally from a previous family. If the combined estate is later divided equally among all children from both relationships, children from one side may benefit from wealth that was never intended for them. Balanced planning in blended families often requires ringfencing inherited assets, using life interest trusts, or structuring the estate so assets ultimately return to the original family line.

If You Are Considering Unequal Provision

Unequal provision, while sometimes the fairer choice, can be contentious. Disappointed beneficiaries may bring a claim under the 1975 Act or challenge the validity of the Will itself. There are practical steps that help to protect the estate's position.

• Set out your reasons clearly in a letter of wishes - a documented explanation of why shares differ can be valuable evidence if a claim is later made
• Keep records of all lifetime gifts and financial support given to any beneficiary
• Carefully assess the needs and circumstances of all potential beneficiaries, not just those you intend to benefit
• Review your Will regularly - circumstances change, and a Will written five years ago may no longer reflect your family's reality
• Consider whether a trust arrangement can achieve your intentions more effectively than an outright unequal gift

The Bigger Picture

Equal inheritance is often seen as the safest and simplest option. For many families, it is exactly right. But a Will should reflect the reality of your family - the different needs, the different contributions, the different vulnerabilities - not just divide a number by the number of children.

A Will that ignores those differences can create real hardship for the people who needed more, and invite legal disputes from those who feel the outcome was unreasonable. Good estate planning looks beyond equal percentages to ask a more fundamental question: is this actually fair?