Why Private Wealth Litigation is booming: Inside the surge of Family Wealth Disputes

Date: 30 Apr 2025

Karen Jones

From billionaire trust battles to contested marriages, private wealth litigation is soaring. Legal experts explain the forces driving this global trend and how families can protect themselves.

The Global Rise of Intra-Family Litigation

The once discreet world of private wealth management is facing unprecedented public scrutiny, as family disputes over fortunes increasingly spill into courtrooms. Across the globe, from media dynasties to entertainment empires, family members are challenging wills, trusts, and even marriages, leading to costly and often highly public litigation. In the wake of ageing founders, complex family structures, and shifting social expectations, private client litigation is on the rise — and the consequences for wealthy families can be profound, both financially and reputationally. Legal experts are warning that families must rethink their approach to wealth planning in this more combative environment.

Offshore Courts: The Last Frontier for Privacy

One important consideration in this new litigation landscape is the protection of privacy or, in other words, keeping problems out of the newspaper headlines. Senior Partner at international law firm Ogier Rachael Reynolds KC, who is based in the Cayman Islands, helps on this point, revealing that offshore courts are better at privacy than onshore. Reynolds confirms that she has seen an uptick in private client work in recent years. “I consider the offshore courts’ protection of privacy in appropriate proceedings to be a key factor in that trend. There is an inherent tension between the principle of open justice which is the default position in the common law courts and the protection of an individual’s right to privacy, particularly in the context of private families with minors. While the onshore jurisdictions have seen a recent trend towards open justice and have moved away from allowing hearings in private, the offshore courts, in general, have kept a consistent approach in allowing families to maintain their confidentiality, and allow for a comprehensive suite of privacy orders in appropriate cases. The Cayman Islands court will balance the competing policy considerations but will typically ensure that proceedings stay confidential. The courts have a number of tools at their disposal for preserving confidentiality. These include: the hearings taking place in private, where only parties to the proceedings and their representatives are permitted to attend; anonymisation orders, where the parties and assets are anonymised in any order or judgment arising from the relevant proceedings, such that parties and assets cannot be identified; and the sealing of the court file, protecting court documentation from access by third parties.”

Cross-Border Assets, Cross-Border Disputes

Richard Pike, a private wealth dispute partner, based in Edinburgh and at UK law firm Brodies adds his view, “The globalisation of private capital has been a major cause of the increase in private client litigation. High net worth families and their assets are increasingly based across multiple jurisdictions, and they move regularly. This leads to arguments over which succession or trust laws should apply, depending on which branch of the family might be preferred. Even within the UK, for example, there can be drastically different outcomes depending on whether English or Scottish laws govern the dispute, something which comes as a shock to many families. Even more surprising is that domicile is very often arguable and open to interpretation. Other countries simply do not recognise trusts either on a legal or cultural level, which can lead to entrenched positions being taken. International disputes are also highly prone to satellite issues, for example arguments about which country should hear the dispute, whether judgments can be enforced across borders, and complexities over international taxation. In the hardest fought matters, all those issues will be brought into play.” 

The Expanding Scope of Private Client Litigation

Pike adds, “The impact of the changing financial and cultural landscape means we are seeing private client litigations expand into new areas, in line with the thematic changes in society over recent years. Over the last 10 years there has been growth in litigation over ‘non-traditional’ investments, such crypto; big money litigation over non-financial investments such as artwork and car collections; and disputes over family investment companies, which are more in line with corporate litigation than traditional trust and succession matters. On the cultural side, as well as the growing problem of mental incapacity as populations age, private client lawyers are having to adapt traditional estate planning methods to evolving social issues such as assisted dying, changing gender-norms, and human rights arguments.”

The Role of Mental Capacity in Will and Trust Disputes

Gilead Cooper KC at Wilberforce Chambers who specialises in high-value disputes, often involving allegations of fraud, breaches of trust and fiduciary duties, and professional negligence and who is also a Citywealth Leaders List Top 10 Trust Litigation Barrister says, “Another factor that has contributed to an increase in disputes over high-value trusts and estates is that life-expectancy has been getting longer and longer, resulting in more instances of age-related mental decline. Challenges to wills and so-called “dynastic” trusts based on allegations of lack of mental capacity are therefore increasingly frequent.”

Cooper continues, “The US is not the only jurisdiction to attract more litigation. In the Private Client field, privacy is often a prime concern, and the offshore courts, most notably Bermuda, Cayman, the BVI, Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man, are more likely to hear cases in private and to deliver anonymised judgments. Combined with increasingly sophisticated legal systems, highly qualified judges, specialist practitioners, and attractive tax regimes, these have become the jurisdiction of choice for much HNW litigation.”

Divorce, Migration and the Legal Fallout

Charles Hale KC, a Family Barrister, Arbitrator and Joint Head of Chambers at 4PB explains the reasons for the increase in litigation from his lens.“In the UK the change in the recent Non-Dom rules has seen an exodus of the rich to financially safer havens such as Jersey, Switzerland or famously in the case of the Richard Gnodde, the Goldman Sachs banker and CEO, (reportedly) to Milan.  But some spouses won’t be happy with a move and the uprooting of children from British schools, friends and family. Nor will they want to risk giving up their rights to a significantly more favourable outcome, if the marriage goes south, from the English divorce courts. The change in the rules has seen an increase in the need for urgent family advice in HNW families and I forecast an uptick in applications to the London divorce court in the coming months both in terms of divorce and financial applications, as well as contested fights about where children should live”.

Why Litigators Should Be Part of Your Planning Team

Building on the use of offshore jurisdictions mentioned by Cooper, Amy Benest, Partner at Baker & Partners, based in Jersey, Channel Islands offers her view. “Global instability continues to see international finance centres such as Jersey and the Cayman Islands treated as good options for wealth and estate planning. Involving offshore litigators at the structuring stage is a critical yet often overlooked step in the creation and review of robust offshore structures. Litigators bring a unique perspective to stress-testing structures, not only showing potential weaknesses that could be exposed in future disputes or regulatory challenges, but also explaining how dynamics between beneficiaries or groups of beneficiaries can develop or be exploited. Their experience in courtroom strategy allows them to predict how a structure might be attacked or defended, ensuring that structures are developed following tax-efficient or regulatory-compliant considerations, but also litigation-resilient. Early input from litigators can dramatically reduce the risk of costly disputes or structural failure under scrutiny.”

Reputational Risks: When Disputes Go Public

In true TV Succession style media tycoon Rupert Murdoch’s attempted to alter the terms of his family’s irrevocable trust to give his eldest son Lachlan control. The trust was valued at approximately £14.9 billion. A Nevada court commissioner ruled against Murdoch, meaning that the original agreement, dividing control equally among the four eldest children, would remain in effect. The cost of the litigation remains undisclosed. Major news organizations, including The New York Times, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, and BBC, extensively covered the case, contributing to its high profile, although most of the case was kept out of the media glare. 

Rebecca Toman, Partner at Carter-Ruck whose practice looks at all aspects of media law, reputation protection and risk and crisis management adds her experienced view, “The reputational fallout from private family wealth disputes of the Succession kind is often underestimated but is often profound and long lasting. Publicised family infighting can result in a loss of asset and share value, blow apart IPOs and attract authority and regulatory investigation as we have seen recently. Securing anonymity in the age of open justice is increasingly hard and even where the parties have looked to keep matters confidential, details often find their way into the press or social media. It is essential that advisors approach private family disputes from the embryonic stages with a holistic view, advising not just on the immediate and long-term legal strategy but the consequences of reputational exposure to the family, whatever the ‘family’ ends up looking like post dispute. Practical measures families can adopt during disputes may include press and social media monitoring, correcting reporting inaccuracies quickly so they do not become ‘record’ and limiting the ‘on record statements’. These can be useful but often add fuel to the story and drive more news cycles.”

The New Economics of Private Litigation

Changing topic, Joshua Rubenstein, Partner and National Chair of Private Wealth at Katten Muchin Rosenman, a law firm, in New York talks about the new landscape of fees. “There has been an enormous increase in private client litigations,” He says “For a myriad reasons, not the least of which is how legal fees are paid. Under UK law based legal systems, the losing party is at risk for paying everyone’s legal fees. Under the so-called “American Rule,” however, generally the loser pays only his or her own fees. Although some countries are beginning to find ways to replicate the American Rule.”  Meanwhile, Rubenstein says, more lawyers are also agreeing to take on estate and trust cases on a “no win, no fee” basis. This means a person might only have to pay legal fees if they win their case and nothing if they lose which can encourage lawyers to take on weaker cases. “That said, completely baseless or frivolous cases are still discouraged. Even under the American Rule, courts can force a bad faith litigant to pay all legal costs if their case is found to have no merit.”

“In addition to “no-win, no-fee” and damages based agreements,” Say Lynsey McIntyre, Broadfield UK, who is an experienced litigator with expertise in cross-border contentious trusts and estates and John Darnton, a trained collaborative lawyer with almost 30 years of experience in dealing with all aspects of matrimonial work, “litigation funding in private client disputes in England & Wales has become a hot topic over the past few years.  Litigation is expensive and can take years to resolve. The cost can often be a barrier to parties pursuing a claim where assets are held in complex trust structures across multiple jurisdictions. Litigation funding ensures regular cash flow to pay lawyers, experts and other litigation support providers and is typically combined with after the event insurance products, to cover the risk of having to pay the other parties’ costs if the claim is unsuccessful. However, funding may not always be available if the claim is for something other than monetary value.” 

On the topic of funding Susan Dunn, founder at Harbour Litigation Funding, shares her expertise. “One of the challenges in any piece of litigation is how to cover the not inconsiderable costs associated with bringing a claim.  There is not only the own side lawyers’ and experts’ fees to consider but also the possibility of having to pay the other sides’ costs in the event the case is not successful.  Such cases can run into the millions in costs.  One option is for a claimant to make use of litigation funding.  This is where a third party funder will cover all the costs of the case in return for a pre agreed share of the proceeds in the event the case is successful and if the claimant is not successful or no money is recovered then it has nothing to pay to the funder.  The Claimant gets to instruct their lawyers in exactly the same way, but a third party pays the bills based on a pre agreed budget.  This can prove a very attractive option for such expensive disputes.  Clearly the funder will need to believe the case is a good one, with good legal prospects, a defendant who can pay and a proportionate budget to the claim value but it is definitely an option worth considering.”

Next Gen vs. Old Guard: A Growing Divide

McIntyre continues, “Increasingly disputes arise due to differences in views between the current and future generations of families, particularly when it comes to investment strategies for assets held in family trusts or the direction of the family business. The next generation might be more inclined to invest in ESG, climate friendly or “Tech” focussed industries, as opposed to more traditional investments. This can create tension between family members as to the future of the family wealth or business and indeed discussions over succession planning.”

Emma Jordan, head of contentious trusts at Taylor Wessing agrees with the next gen sentiment. “The global transfer of wealth to younger generations is causing more structures to come under scrutiny as priorities change. The new successors want to do things differently and do not have tax as a driver. As a result, we are seeing the younger generation come to us directly as a litigation team to protect assets and bring claims against bad actors for past actions which have been ignored under their parents watch. This is also having a seismic effect on the governance of family offices and the corporate structures holding the family wealth. The younger generation have woken up to the fact that control centres around the trust not the company. As a result, private wealth disputes are going to increase significantly across the next few years.”

Darnton adds some examples of high profile challenges against wills, “In recent years, the English Court has dealt with one of the highest value probate disputes where the court found that the wealthy but illiterate businessman, Kevin Reeves, had been influenced by his daughter to update his will but had not known or approved of the contents of his will.  If the will had been upheld, the bulk of his estate worth £100m would have gone to his daughter, cutting out his son and grandchildren entirely, which was not in line with his intentions. Whilst the English courts uphold the principle of testamentary freedom, we continue to see claims by family members under the Inheritance Act 1975 where they believe that they have not received reasonable financial provision under the will, which was also the subject of the recent TV drama “I, Jack Wright”.  The 1975 Act also applies where wealthy individuals do not make a will and their estate falls to be dealt with under the Intestacy Rules, as in the case of Amy Winehouse who died very young. Her estate worth £3m passed to her parents under the Intestacy Rules. Amy’s ex-husband, Blake, later claimed that he was entitled to £1m under the 1975 Act, but his claim failed.”  

Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Path Forward

McIntyre adds, “Against this backdrop of increased family disputes, the English Courts have recently clarified that they have the power to order parties to engage in some form of alternative dispute resolution/ADR, in the form of mediation or some other form of negotiation, to attempt to resolve the dispute before it goes to trial.  If a party refuses, then they may be penalised in costs, even if they go on to win their case. By nature, private client disputes often involve multiple parties and provided ADR is conducted at the appropriate time and a settlement is agreed, this can mitigate the risks of litigation and help to salvage family relations.”

Prateek Swaika, a London-based solicitor advocate and partner at law firm Boies Schiller Flexner, adds a useful overview. “The rise in private wealth disputes underscores a critical truth: families must prioritize proactive succession planning anchored in three pillars. First, set up meticulously drafted wills in all relevant jurisdictions, trust deeds, and letters of wishes that are regularly updated to reflect evolving family dynamics and financial landscapes. Ambiguity in these documents is the single greatest catalyst for disputes. Second, appoint impartial, trustees who can navigate emotional tensions while ensuring the grantor’s intent is honoured. Trustees must balance financial stewardship with mediation skills to defuse conflicts before they escalate. Third, educate heirs transparently about their roles and responsibilities, fostering a culture of stewardship rather than entitlement. Regular family governance meetings, guided by advisors, can align expectations and address grievances in a controlled setting.” Swaika adds, “When disputes arise, resist the urge to litigate as a reflex. Instead, use mediators early or seek collaborative legal pathways to preserve relationships and protect the estate’s value. Ultimately, the goal is not just to transfer wealth, but to safeguard a legacy.” Darnton agrees and warns that , “Family trusts, even those of a more dynastic nature, continue to be the target of claims made within divorce proceedings, even in more modest cases to the value of £10-£20m, especially where trust funds have been used in the acquisition of the family home/s.”

Legal Grey Areas and Future Flashpoints

Citing more reasons for litigation, Rubenstein picks a further topic. “There has also been an erosion of attorney-client privilege in the fiduciary context, adds Rubenstein, “on the theory that counsel to the fiduciary owes the same duty to the fiduciary’s beneficiaries.” What this means is that traditionally, communications between a lawyer and client are protected by lawyer-client privilege. However, in the fiduciary context, for example, when a lawyer advises a trustee or executor, courts increasingly hold that the lawyer’s duty may extend not only to the fiduciary but also to the beneficiaries. In such cases, beneficiaries can argue that they are entitled to see the legal advice given to the fiduciary, weakening traditional notions of confidentiality.”

“Then there has been an explosion of lifetime contests over capacity to make a will, to make a trust or to marry,” continues Rubenstein, “Contesting marriages is the latest in the line of such contests. High-profile cases illustrate these emerging patterns in private wealth litigation.In the case of Sumner Redstone, the former chairperson of CBS and Viacom, his former girlfriend and family members questioned his ability to make decisions, which led to court proceedings, including a court-ordered examination by a geriatric psychiatrist.

Blended families have turned trust funds into battlegrounds

Ronni Davidowitz, Head of Katten’s New York Trusts and Estates Practice adds her thoughts, “With the prevalence of blended families and the aging of the family members of the older generation, there has been an uptick in family controversies. Of particular relevance, younger generations are increasingly looking to wrest control of family assets or gain premature access to funds held in trusts or estates, especially where there is a perception of diminished capacity. These actions have often led to costly disputes, unfortunate family disharmony, and in some cases, public embarrassment of senior family members. This dynamic further amplifies the tension in wealth planning between providing comfort and security for younger generations and creating an unintended sense of entitlement within the ranks.”

Rubenstein adds a theme, “Post-death contests also continue to abound, be they about wills or trusts.” As example, following the death of music icon Aretha Franklin, two handwritten wills were found at her home. One was discovered in a cabinet, and another was found under a sofa cushion. This discovery led to a legal battle in Michigan probate court, where Aretha’s sons contested the validity of the wills. A jury ultimately ruled that the 2014 document, found in the sofa cushions, was the valid will.

Where you live can decide the fate of your family’s fortune

“Finally,” says Rubenstein, “the effectiveness of ‘no contest clauses’, which is a provision that stipulates a beneficiary will forfeit their inheritance if they challenge the will’s validity or terms, varies dramatically upon the governing law and the law of the decedent’s or grantor’s domicile.” No contest clauses are a provision that says a beneficiary will lose their inheritance if they challenge the will’s validity. This clause aims to discourage beneficiaries from pursuing claims against the estate. 

High-Profile Cases That Changed the Game

A difference in USA court decisions was illustrated in the dispute involving former Playboy Playmate Anna Nicole Smith and the estate of oil magnate, J. Howard Marshall who died in 1995. Anna Nicole Smith married Marshall when she was 26 and he was 89. Anna claimed in a lawsuit against Marshall’s youngest son, that she had been verbally promised half of the $1.6bn estate. The U.S. Supreme Court, who were consulted twice, sided with Texas where probate proceedings were taking place, ruling that the bankruptcy court in California, who had allowed Nicole Smith to pursue her claim, had exceeded its authority.

Conclusion: Safeguarding Wealth and Legacy

As the global landscape of private wealth grows ever more complex, families face a delicate balancing act: protecting assets across generations while safeguarding the relationships that bind them. In an era where private disputes are increasingly fought on public stages, careful planning, clear communication, and flexible structures are no longer luxuries — they are essential defences. For families looking to preserve both their fortunes and their legacies, understanding the new realities of private client litigation has never been more critical.

See the Citywealth Top 100 litigators

Subscribe to the Citywealth Weekly Newsletter to learn more about Private Wealth Management.