Oliver Ingham 2 e1633791103317

Oliver Ingham

Year of Call: 2015
Email Address: [email protected]
Telephone: 020 7583 8055

How to use the Shortlist tool?

Clerk Details

  • Clerk Name: David Fielder
  • Clerk Telephone: 020 7583 8055
  • Clerk Email: [email protected]

Property and Estates


Oliver is an experienced trial advocate insofar as litigation under the Inheritance Act 1975 is concerned (the core focus of his practice) both in the Chancery and Family Division". Oliver has been described as a "go-to" junior Counsel in respect of Claims litigated under the Inheritance Act 1975, and was named as Junior Equity and Trusts Lawyer of the Year in the ACQ5 Legal Awards (UK) 2020. Oliver is also recognised and highly ranked in traditional Chancery/Property and Estates by the Legal 500 (Tier 1), Chambers and Partners and C&P High Net Worth, as well as being named a 'Rising Star" in London and Midlands (Chancery Tax and Probate).

Recent representative examples include:

Hirachand v Hirachand ("Re H") [2020] EWHC (Fam) 1134

This case 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. Oliver is acting for the Appellant who obtained permission to appeal on all grounds raised. Oliver is led by Brie Stevens-Hoare KC.

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

Successfully represented the trustees in a four day trial before Mr Richard Meade KC (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.

  • Recommendations

    Oliver Ingham of 3PB Barristers is an expert in probate litigation and often acts for clients in Inheritance Act claims.
    Strengths: “The tribunal finds him to be very engaging.”
    “He is passionate and tenacious without losing sight of the big picture.”
    “Oliver is very responsive, user friendly, driven and enthusiastic.”

    Chambers UK 2024/Chancery: Traditional/London Bar

    Oliver Ingham is an expert in probate litigation and often acts for clients in Inheritance Act claims. He has also developed a niche in representing Islamic clients and adopting relevant principles when framing a civil claim.
    Strengths: "Oliver is extremely tenacious; you want him in your corner."
    Chambers UK 2023/Chancery: Traditional/London Bar

    Oliver Ingham of 3PB Barristers is an expert in probate litigation and often acts for clients in Inheritance Act claims. A source asserts: "Oliver is extremely tenacious. You want him in your corner." Ingham has also developed a niche in Islamic finance matters and Shari'a inheritance.
    Chambers and Partners 2022 High Net Worth/Chancery: Traditional - London (Bar)

    ‘Oliver is quick to identify the essential nature of the case and is adept at conveying that to the client. He is also very client-friendly.’
    Legal 500 2024/Private Client: Trusts and Probate/Leading Junior/London Bar

    Rising star Oliver Ingham specialises in traditional Chancery litigation at all levels of the court system and is part of a team handling a high-profile Inheritance Act-related case, Hirachand v Hirachand, in the Supreme Court.

    'Oliver is quick to grasp the key issues. He is superb in mediation, holding his own against very experienced counsel on the other side and with the mediator.'
    Legal 500 2024/Chancery, Probate and Tax/Rising Star/Midlands Circuit - Ranked: Tier 1

    ‘Oliver Ingham is very hard-working and conscientious in his approach. He really cares for the client and does his utmost to achieve the best for the client. He is also really quick to respond and helpful in his hands-on approach.’ 
    Legal 500 2023/Private Client: Trusts and Probate/Rising Star/London Bar - Ranked: Tier 1

    "Rising star Oliver Ingham is praised for his ‘good judgment and the ability to argue difficult cases’ and successfully acted for a disabled adult child concerning an estate worth £1m."

    ‘Oliver Ingham is hard-working, diligent, and thorough as well as being sympathetic to clients in difficult circumstances. He is responsive and approachable.’
    Legal 500 2023/Chancery, Probate and Tax/Rising Star/Midlands Circuit - Ranked: Tier 1

    ''Oliver is very conscientious; he knows his subject area backwards. He always makes himself available when you need him. We have a lot of trust for him and he operates at a far higher level than his relatively modest number of years call would indicate.''
    Legal 500 2022/Chancery, Probate and Tax/Rising Star/Midlands Circuit - Ranked: Tier 1

  • Expand recommendations
View Full CV