The significant risks associated with failing in your duties as an executor

The recent case of Fisher & Ors v Fisher [2026] EWHC 1508 (Ch) is a reminder of the Court’s powers to hold executors accountable if they are found to have repeatedly failed in their fiduciary duties to act appropriately and engage with the Court and/or beneficiaries.

Background

Myrtle Joyce Fisher (“the Deceased”) died on 13 September 2017. Prior to her death, she executed her Last Will & Testament dated 16 May 2013 (“the 2013 Will”) whereby she appointed her son, Mr William Edward Fisher (“William”), and her grandson, Edward, as her executors and trustees. The Deceased’s residuary estate was left as to:

• 20% to William;
• 20% to her daughter Wendy;
• 20% to her daughter Julia;
• 20% to her daughter Caroline; and
• The remaining 20% to be divided amongst her three grandchildren, Melanie, Matthew and 
  Lorraine equally.

The Grant of Probate for the Deceased’s estate was issued on 19 October 2018 but the estate remains to be fully administered despite the passing of over eight years since her death.

On 10 June 2020, a Part 8 form was issued by some of the beneficiaries of the Deceased’s estate which sought to remove William as executor and have an independent administrator appointed as replacement. The claim cited that William had failed to supply the Claimant’s with proper and complete information about the estate, that he had acted in his own best interests which put him in conflict with his duties as executor and that he had not been impartial in the way he dealt with the beneficiaries. Documentation was also sought to assist the new administrator with being able to complete the administration.

Deputy Master Nurse removed William as an executor and trustee on 16 October 2020 and appointed a professional independent administrator. The administrator was granted permission to apply for directions from the Court which it chose to do so. The Court made an Order which identified four factual issues that remained to be determined. Unfortunately, William failed to engage with the directions made by the Court and repeatedly refused invitations to mediate with the Claimants. 

As a result of his conduct, and the findings made in relation to the factual issues which were determined, the Court ordered that William was to pay the Claimant’s costs on the indemnity basis, which is unusual. It also ordered that the sum of £50,000 was to be paid by William on account of costs within 28 days. 

Lessons to be learned

This case demonstrates the Court’s wide range of powers to hold executors personally accountable for their failures which can include significant cost sanctions. 

In this particular case, the Court noted that the case was outside the norm of normal litigation and that it had not been conducted in the way it should have been. It went on to remind parties that they have an obligation to engage with the process of litigation and that they should be trying to settle the case outside of Court, and should be using non-Court dispute resolution wherever possible. The Court recognised that William may have felt aggrieved as he felt he was acting in the best interests of the Deceased’s estate. However, his conduct was not excusable, and this was the reason he was ordered to pay costs on the indemnity basis.  The Court recognised that it was a deeply sad and regrettable case concerning the Deceased and the consequent fall out between family members and extended family members. 

The case is also a reminder to those acting as a fiduciary that they must engage and that refusal will likely result in being held personally accountable. Executors should seek independent legal advice as a matter of priority if they have concerns in relation to how they are administering an estate and should also work alongside the beneficiaries to ensure they are kept up to date as to what steps are being taken to progress the administration and/or any hurdles the executor is having to resolve which may explain for an increase in delays to the administration.

Separately, beneficiaries also have significant rights in respect of the estate and how it is being managed. In the event that there are concerns in relation to the executor’s behaviour, there are a number of options available which can assist the beneficiaries with holding the executor accountable and ensuring that the administration is dealt with in a cost effective and appropriate manner.