Disputed parentage in intestacy claims

Disputed parentage in intestacy claims: when a birth certificate isn’t conclusive

Where someone dies without a Will, the intestacy rules determine who inherits from the decease. In simple terms:

The estate passes to the deceased’s children in equal shares. That includes children that are born within or outside of marriage. Legal parentage is key – not family dynamics, fairness, or informal arrangements.

A person named on a birth certificate can rely on it as strong evidence of parentage. However, it is not conclusive proof and can be challenged.

Administering an estate is rarely straightforward, but matters become significantly more complex when the identity of the beneficiaries is disputed.

The problem: a disputed child

In a recent case we advised on, a lay executor was faced with precisely that situation: an individual named on a birth certificate claimed to be a child of the deceased, while the family disputed that he was the biological son.

Furthermore, what he considered at first blush to be a straightforward delineation of the estate, turned out to unite him with a side of the family he previously hadn’t know. What followed is a useful illustration of how these disputes unfold in practice — and how executors can (and should) protect themselves.

In this case, the executor was faced with:

• A claimant asserting entitlement based on a birth certificate
• A firm and consistent family view that he was not biologically related
• Significant emotional background and conflicting family narratives

In this instance, a party came forward presenting a birth certificate purporting to name the deceased as his father. Whilst this may have been prima facie evidence, the truth behind it was most different and his DNA bore a different story.

Once we explored the background to the family dynamic it became clear that the family history was far more complicated than expected with six children from four adults, five of whom were unsure of their biological parentage and two had predeceased.

We prepared a family tree and obtained all relevant birth and death certificates to enable us to understand the full picture. Our client tracked down the children of the two who had pre-deceased. At the same time, the disputed child refused to engage with DNA testing, despite repeated opportunities being offered, at the cost of the estate.

Instead, correspondence focused on wider issues and allegations rather than the core legal question: parentage and DNA evidence. This is where an impasse was reached.

Why this causes deadlock

From a legal perspective, the difficulty is straightforward. An executor cannot safely include or exclude a potential beneficiary without certainty.

At the same time, the executor cannot decide parentage themselves and the estate cannot be distributed safely until the issue is resolved; if the claimant refuses to engage with testing, progress stalls.

This creates what many executors experience as a circular dispute – where the same point is raised repeatedly without resolution.

The role of DNA evidence in disputed parentage intestacy claims

In modern probate disputes, DNA testing is the primary route to resolving contested parentage. From a risk perspective, a claimant who refuses DNA testing raises immediate evidential concerns. Practitioners, and courts, are likely to question:

Why not resolve the issue definitively?

As noted in this case, such a refusal would be a “red flag” to any solicitor assessing the merits of a claim. In practice, this can significantly weaken a claimant’s position.

The executor’s dilemma

The executor in this matter faced a very real commercial and practical issue. Pursuing court proceedings, by way of an Order for Directions under Part 64 CPR, would incur significant legal costs, the recovery of which from a party seeking to claim an inheritance and who may be “a man of straw”, is risky; it could also seriously deplete the estate.

It would however provide legal certainty, compel the claimant to a DNA or/and ultimately, give the executor court authority to administer the estate, free from the risk of any future claims.

Taking a commercial view

Ultimately, what is striking about this case is the executor’s approach to risk.

Rather than allowing matters to drift indefinitely and with our structured legal advice on the intestacy position and risk of a claim, the executor carefully assessed the legal and evidential position.

In this instance, he considered the likelihood of a viable claim and made a commercial decision on how to proceed.

Key takeaways for executors

This case highlights several important lessons:

1. Focus on the legal issue

However emotional or complex the background, intestacy claims turn on legal status and evidence, not personal history.

2. Offer a clear route to resolution

Providing a reasonable avenue (such as DNA testing) is critical. If this is refused, the executor is in a stronger position.

3. Keep an audit trail

Document offers of testing, correspondence and evidence considered. This will assist should a claim be forthcoming.

4. Avoid endless engagement

Repeated correspondence that does not address the key issue can increase costs, deplete the estate, prolong the administration and escalate disputes. Decisive action is needed.

5. Take a proportionate, commercial view

Executors are entitled to assess, litigation risk, costs exposure and likely outcomes. As our client noted in this case, at some point the issue becomes one of time and cost versus progress.

Final thoughts on handling disputed parentage in intestacy claims – seeing the whole picture

Disputes over parentage in intestacy cases are particularly challenging because they sit at the intersection of legal entitlement, family dynamics and evidential uncertainty. But the core principle remains clear:

Executors must act cautiously, reasonably and in accordance with the law even where others refuse to engage.

Handled properly, these cases can be brought back to first principles and resolved in a way that protects both the estate and the executor.

On resolution of this matter, our client’s feedback was…

You made us think things through – we wouldn’t have known what to do with the other beneficiaries otherwise. This wouldn’t have been brought to light if you hadn’t had been frank with us. I’ve met a whole part of my family I didn’t even know… and they’re lovely!

How can Morr & Co help?

If you have any questions or would like any further information on the content of this article, please do not hesitate to contact our Dispute Resolution team, who will be happy to help. Or email info@morrlaw.com or call us on 0333 038 9100 and one of our team will be happy to assist.

Disclaimer
Although correct at the time of publication, the contents of this newsletter/blog are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute, legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article. Please contact us for the latest legal position.