K7010 3PB Oliver Ingham Barrister

Oliver Ingham

Year of Call: 2015
Email Address: oliver.ingham@3pb.co.uk
Telephone: 020 7583 8055

How to use the Shortlist tool?


Oliver Ingham is a Chancery Barrister with a specific interest in Probate, Insolvency and general Private Client work. Oliver regularly appears in the Business and Property Courts, and has been instructed on a wide range of matters in the High Court and Court of Appeal. Oliver has a specific interest in Claims under the 1975 Act, particularly those brought by Spousal and Co-habitant Claimants, and has experience of representing every category of Claimant under the Act. Likewise, Oliver has acted for Clients in a wide variety of Will Challenges, applications to remove Executors and Trustees, and Claims under CPR Part 64.

Oliver also undertakes a wide variety of commercial chancery work, including commercial disputes where there is a strong emphasis on equitable relief/breach of trust.

Oliver also has an interest in costs-only probate, insolvency and commercial proceedings (particularly detailed assessment proceedings in the Senior Courts Costs Office).

Oliver has obtained a qualification in Shari'a Law from the University of Edinburgh, and is increasingly instructed on matters concerning Islamic finance (particularly as it pertains to Inheritance), and can represent Claimants and Defendants at the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal and at Court on a wide variety of matters related to Shari'a.

Oliver is an affiliate of the Society of Trusts and Estates Practitioners and can advise on non-contentious Probate matters, including in relation to Estate Planning.

Reported cases

  • Hirachand v Hirachand ("Re H") [2020] EWHC (Fam) 1134 which found for the first time that a Court could order an Estate to pay for a CFA Uplift as part of an award under the Inheritance Act 1975. Further, an award was made by video link in circumstances where the Defendant (who was unrepresented) a profoundly deaf and disabled 87 year old woman who could not hear or see what was going on. The Defendant had been debarred from defending the Claim.
    Since this decision was handed down, it has become commonplace for Claimants to now claim entitlement to be paid a CFA Uplift in most 1975 Act Claims that come before the Chancery or Family Division of the High Court. Oliver was instructed to appeal the decision to the Court of Appeal.
  • Hanger Holdings v Perlake Corporation SA & Anor [2021] EWHC 81 (Ch) - Oliver represented the Defendant pre-Trial (including settling the Pleadings) in relation to the allegation that a Website Domain Name (blackjack.com) was held on trust by the Defendant. The Case confirmed for the first time that a Domain Name is intangible property which can be subject to equitable interests/held on trust.
  • Williams v Nu Design and Build [2021] EWHC 197; [2021] 1 WLUK 148 - Oliver successfully defeated an application for summary judgment in circumstances where the Claimant sought to persuade the Court that a clause of a Contract was unreasonable pursuant to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. The Court held that it was generally inappropriate to summarily determine reasonableness before liability had been established, because the Court would necessarily need to know what liability was sought to be excluded under the term.
  • Re H [2020] EWHC 1134 (Fam) - Oliver is instructed in the appeal of this decision to the Court of Appeal on behalf of the Appellant/Beneficiary. The Court of Appeal will consider whether the High Court erred in law when awarding the Claimant her CFA Uplift.
  • HCQ Sarl v Terre Primitive Limited [2019] EWHC 2556 (Ch); [2019] WLUK 385 (before Norris J) - Oliver successfully represented the Claimant in obtaining an injunction restraining the holding of a Meeting/placement of the Company into Members Voluntary Liquidation. The case set out the principles to be applied when one seeks to injunct a Company's members from placing the Company into MVL.
  • Premiair Areospace v Foley [2019] EWHC 1805 (QB) (before Whipple J), concerned the extent to which Summary Judgment should be available in cases involving Dishonest Assistance/Knowing receipt when breach of trust is alleged.
  • Baxter v Todd [2019] All ER 194 (Jul); [2019] EWHC 1959 (Ch) - Oliver successfully represented the Defendant in the trial of a Will Claim involving Undue Influence, the Illegality Defence and Constrictive Trusts.
  • Trustees of Haie Estate v Maass [2019] All ER 175 (Jan); [2019] EWHC 95 (Ch) - Oliver successfully represented the Defendant Trustees in a Claim based in acquiescence estoppel.
  • Pantiles Investments v Winckler [2019] All ER 134 (Mar); [2019] 2 BCLC 295 - Oliver acted for the Defendant in a fraudulent trading/breach of trust Claim.
  • Popely v Drukkers Solicitors [2019] EWHC 187 (QB); [2019] 2 WLUK 224 - Oliver acted for the Claimant in a Claim for breach of confidence (and application for injunction) against Solicitors who intended to use e-mails allegedly stolen from the Claimant in a Trial of a separate action commencing in the Chancery Division.

Unreported/ Other High Court cases

  • Premiair v Privaero [2019] EWHC 197 (QB) (Queen’s Bench Division, led by Lord Marks QC) - Oliver acted as Junior Counsel for the Claimant in a fraud/dishonest assistance/knowing receipt Claim.
  • Vitillo v Riddiough [2020] EWHC 187 (Ch) - Oliver acted for the successful spousal Claimant in respect of a Claim brought against a £1,400,000 Estate (in which the Claimant obtained nearly all the assets in the Estate).
  • A v I and Ors [2020] (Chancery Division) - Oliver represented a defendant beneficiary in a Claim brought against a £2,000,000 estate by cohabitant claimants.
  • J v P [2020] (Chancery Division) - Oliver represented the Claimant in a Will Challenge (capacity) brought against a £800,000 Estate.
  • Corona v Corona [2019] (Family Division) - Oliver acted for the successful spousal Claimant in respect of a Claim brought against a £750,000 Estate.
  • Deutsche Leasing Limited v Zaskin College [2018] EWHC 110 (QBD) - Oliver acted for the Defendant in respect of a Claim for breach of contract concerning the supply of CNC machines.
  • Wilson v Lassman (No 2) [2017] EWHC 957 (Ch) - Oliver acted for the adult child Claimant in a Claim bought out of time under section 4.
  • Kapadia v Falayie [2017] EWHC 2030 (Ch) - Oliver acted for the successful Defendant in a Claim regarding relief from forfeiture (which also contained allegations that the Claim was an abuse of process).
  • W v F [2017] EWHC 291 (Fam) - Oliver acted as sole counsel on behalf of the Claimant in an adult-child Claim under the 1975 Act brought in respect of a £1,700,000 Estate.
  • Gao v Atwal [2017] EWHC 2011 (Ch) - Oliver represented the successful Defendant in a Claim concerning prescription/rights of way.
  • Hume v Jackson [2017] (Chancery Division, Manchester) - Oliver represented the sole beneficiary of a £1,300,000 Estate in his defence of a Claim brought by a co-habitant under the 1975 Act.
  • Ball v Jackson and ors [2016] EWHC 88 (Ch) - Oliver represented the successful Claimant in a Part 64 Claim concerning the construction of a Will, as well as a dispute over the propriety of a Prospective Costs Order.

Work as a Junior:

Oliver is currently being led by Geraint Jones QC in swaps litigation in the Commercial Court (Birmingham). Oliver is also being led by Jonathan Marks QC in an appeal, and is further being led by Brie Stephens-Hoare QC in a Chancery Division Claim regarding Secured Loan Agreement. Oliver is also being led by Geraint Jones QC in a Chancery Division Claim regarding allegations of tortious conspiracy by a chain of Gentleman’s Clubs. Oliver has previously been led by David Berkeley QC in a Partnership Dispute.


  • Property and Estates
    Add this expertise to your shortlist


    Oliver has a successful practice acting for clients in a wide range of Probate disputes. Oliver has a primary focus on the 1975 Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act but has also acted on several applications to remove Executors under section 50 AJA 1985. Oliver also regularly receives instructions on CPR Part 64 (Non-Contentious) Trusts claims.

    Recent representative examples include:

    • SL v JL (Family Division, Ongoing): Spousal 1975 Act Claim in circumstances were Will only provided for life interest in FMH.
    • Re A (Inheritance Act Claim)(Family Division, Ongoing): Defending a 1975 Act Claim by a Spouse on behalf of an Adult Child Sole Beneficiary.
    • H v H (Family Division (Leeds)) Ongoing: Adult Child 1975 Act Claim where Claimant has severe mental health difficulties.
    • CA v BD (Chancery Division, Ongoing): Derivative Claim brought by beneficiaries of one Estate against the Executor of another. Claimants are adopting the Vanderpitt procedure. Also concerns s50 application to remove Executor.
    • Trustees of Haie Estate v Christian Maass [2019] EWHC (Ch) 1129: Sucessfully represented the Trustees in a four day trial before Mr Richard Meade QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) concerning a Claim brought on the basis of acquiescence Estoppel. The Judgment resolved some uncertainty regarding the circumstances that such a Claim might be made out, and clarified the exceptionality of this nature of relief.
    • Washington v Downie [2018] EWHC 2210 (Ch) (Falk J): The Judgment concerned the extent to which Estate Accounts should be disclosed to third parties who are not beneficiaries under the Will, but who claim to be under other rival Wills. It was held that Estate Accounts need not disclosable in this circumstance. A person who wishes to prove a different Will and revoke a grant of probate can do so without sight of Estate Accounts.
    • Wilson v Lassman (No 2) EWCH Ch 85 (Master Bowles) (Adult Child/Section 4 application)
    • Abbasi v Abassi [2017] EWCH Ch (s50 Application to remove an Executor)
    • Ball v Jackson [2016] EWCH Ch (Pelling J) (Detailed assessment of Executor-Solicitor’s costs)
    • Green v Green [2017] EWCH Ch (Application under section 50 to remove Executor)
    • P v S (Ongoing) (Chancery Division) (Application under s116 to pass over/Beddoes Relief/third party breach of trust claim arising out of an alleged abuse of Lasting Power of Attorney)
    • Salmon v Green [2017] (Non-family Dependent (Carer) 1975 Act Claim)
    • Hulme v Estate of Anthony Ball [2016] EWCH (Fam) (Defending beneficiaries against a Co-habitant 1975 Act Claim against a £1.3mil Estate)
    • F v A (Ongoing) (High Court, Chancery Division) (Co-habitant 1975 Act Claim against a £2,000,000 Estate)
    • V v A (Ongoing) (High Court, Chancery Division) (Spousal 1975 Act Claim against a £1,500,000 Estate)
    • Smith v A (Ongoing) (Chancery Division) (Adult Child 1975 Act Claim involving section 4 and 9 application)
    • W v Y (Ongoing) (High Court, Family Division) (Adult Child 1975 Act Claim, 4 day trial before MacDonald J)
    • A v B (Ongoing) (Central London CC) (Adult Child 1975 Act Claim, 5 day trial before HHJ Madge)
    • C v C (Ongoing) (Central London CC) (Defending Minor Child 1975 Act Claim against £500,000 Estate)
    • Re M (Ongoing) (Central London CC) (Adult Child 1975 Act Claim, section 4 application)
    • Re G (Ongoing) (Central London CC) (Co-habitant 1975 Act Claim against £700,000 Estate)
    • RE H (Ongoing) (Manchester CC) (Defending Co-habitant 1975 Act Claim against £1,200,000 Estate)
    • RE A (Ongoing) (Winchester CC) (Adult Child 1975 Act Claim against a small Estate (£400,000)
    • Re PNG Trust (Ongoing) (High Court, Chancery Division) (Part 64 Claim/Construction Claim)
    • Re X Estate (Ongoing) (High Court, Chancery Division)(Part 64 Claim/Account and Inquiry)
    • Kaur v Dhaliwal [2014] EWCA 1991 Ch; [2014] All ER (D) 164 (Jun) (Co-habitant 1975 Act Appeal concerning the interpretation of “2 years” (as Martin Young’s Pupil assisting post-appeal)
    • Personal Representative of the Estate of ED v Personal Representative of the Estate of JF [2018] EWHC (Ch): Acting for a Personal Representative in a Claim to set aside a loan agreement, along with various claims under the Solicitors Act 1974
    • RC v BC [2018] EWHC (Fam): Acting as Sole Counsel for a spousal Claimant against a Will which disposed of her husband’s entire Estate (including the Matrimonial Home) without making any provision for his wife
    • Re T, Central London County Court (ongoing): Acting for a co-habitant Claimant in an application under section 9 (to sever a joint tenancy of the quasi-matrimonial home) and 10 (to set aside transfers intended to defeat her Claim
    • Re C, High Court, Family Division (ongoing): Acting for a severely disabled adult child Claimant in a Claim for reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance Act 1975
    • Re O, Central London County Court (ongoing): Acting for a co-habitant claimant under the Inheritance Act 1975, where a preliminary issue concerns the Claimant’s eligibility to make a Claim under section 1(1A) due to allegations that the relationship was “polyamorous” and therefore not akin to marriage
    • Estate of A v Estate of S, High Court, Chancery Division (ongoing): Acting for the Claimant in a Constructive Trust/Estoppel Claim/ Claim to remove an Executor, where it alleged that a Trust existed over property owned by two deceased persons. The Claim is by beneficiaries of the Estate of A, who bring a derivative (or “Vanderpitt”) Claim against the Estate of S, on the basis that the two estates share the same Personal Representative.

    Oliver also has a keen interest in costs-only Probate work. In particular he has acted in relation to the detailed assessment of Executor-Solicitor costs in the Senior Courts Costs Office and enjoys advising about the reasonableness and proportionality of the costs of Estate Administration. In particular, Oliver has an interest in the assessment of Third Party costs by way of account and inquiry (using the procedure in Tim Morris Interiors v Akin Gump) and in the application of  the "one fifth" rule to SCCO proceedings.

    Oliver occasionally acts on a CFA basis (usually in 1975 Act Claims involving Spouses or Co-habitants) and is always pleased to discuss options.

  • Commercial
    Add this expertise to your shortlist


    Oliver’s primary commercial interest is in Financial Services and Banking. Prior to coming to the bar Oliver worked as a Risk Analyst with a particular focus on AIM and Secondary Markets.

    Oliver is currently instructed on two Commercial Court matters in his own right:

    • A £1,000,000 commercial fraud claim against a former de facto Director relating to the illicit diversion of business away from the Company to a Competitor
    • A £1,200,000 Claim (brought under FSMA 2000) in relation to a dispute over unsecured bond agreements (more particularly a civil action for breach of the COBS rules)

    Oliver is also currently acting on a number of matters in the Chancery Division, including:

    • Defending a £1,000,000 Claim relating to a secured finance agreement on the basis of Illegality and FSMA 2000
    • A Claim against a private share market for damages exceeding £1,000,000 relating to a refusal to list shares.

    Oliver occasionally appears in the Queen’s Bench Division, most recently in relation to a claim involving breach of confidence/privacy/libel (in a Commercial context). Oliver has also appeared in the Technology and Construction Court in disputes where there is a “Chancery” element to the Case.

    The following cases are examples of Oliver’s recent/on-going Commercial work:

    • ROVOP v Install Sarl [2017] (Mercantile Court) (Moulder J) (Proceedings relating to the interpretation of a settlement agreement in a £700,000 claim over international supply agreements)
    • Greenland Mining Management and ors v Persons Unknown [2017] EWHC (QB) 18 (King J) (Injunction in the context of Financial Services)
    • X Market Technologies v Davies [2016] (Chancery Division) (Abuse of process/dispute as to enforceability of contractual/liquidated damages clause)
    • Oliver is being lead by David Berkley QC on a Solicitor/partnership dispute
    • Assisting as one of many juniors in a large international litigation regarding the Oil and Gas sector.


    Oliver is instructed in the upcoming trial of two Companies Court actions relating to preferences, director misfeasance and alleged fraud. More generally:

    • Oliver regularly attends Winding-Up Court (including the trial of disputed debt petitions) and attends the Interim Applications Court to obtain Injunctions restraining presentation of a Petition
    • Public examinations
    • Bankruptcy Petitions (including the trial of whether offers have been unreasonably refused, and petitions with an international element)
    • Insolvency claims in the context of Probate

    Oliver has a keen interest in costs-only Insolvency work. Recently Oliver has advised in relation to an application to set aside default costs certificates issued in Insolvency Proceedings and has advised on the subsequent detailed assessment proceedings (inter-parties and Trustee costs) before the SCCO. Oliver is happy to advise on the drafting and preparation of costs proceedings (Points of Objection/Precedent A/R etc).

Academic qualifications

  • University of Exeter, LLB Law: 1st class degree (top 1st in all three years) (2013)
  • University of Oxford, Bachelor of Civil Law (2014)


  • Lord Mansfield Scholarship (Lincoln’s Inn)
  • Sunley Pupillage Scholarship (Lincoln’s Inn)
  • Hardwike Scholarship (Lincoln’s Inn)
  • Sweet and Maxwell Prize (Top 3rd year)
  • Oxford University Press Prize (Top 2nd year)
  • Routledge Prize (Top 1st year)
  • Bracton Law Prize
  • Christina Sachs Law Prize
  • Exeter Advocacy Prize
  • Oxford University Law Faculty Prize (Individual Paper)
  • SNR Denton Prize (Commercial Awareness)
  • DLA Piper Prize

Professional bodies

  • STEP (Affiliate)
  • Member of the Chancery Bar Association
  • Member of the Association of Costs Lawyers

Direct Access

Oliver Ingham is qualified to accept instructions directly from members of the public and professional clients under the Direct Public Access scheme.

More Information