Inheritance Disputes Among Family Members: What to Do

Last updated on June 6, 2025

Inheritance disputes within families can be one of the most emotionally charged and complex conflicts. When a loved one passes away, the overwhelming emotion is often one of deep grief, but this can be compounded by disagreements over how their estate is to be divided and distributed.

Inheritance disputes can stem from a range of causes, including ambiguity in legal documents, and can cause even tightly knit families to be at odds. To ensure a fair outcome and to preserve familial relationships, it is thus crucial to understand the causes of such inheritance disputes, the legal aspects involved and the available avenues for resolution.

This article will cover the following key topics:

Common inheritance disputes among family members

Inheritance disputes refer to disagreements that arise after someone’s death, over how their money, property and assets should be divided. Such disputes can arise in many different forms. A few of the most common inheritance disputes are discussed below, along with the legal aspects involved.

Unequal distribution of assets

One common type of inheritance disputes concerns one or more family members perceiving that the inheritance has been distributed unequally or unfairly.

This can arise when one or more family members get a smaller share of the inheritance than other beneficiaries. For example, in 2020, two children of a wealthy widow challenged the validity of her will, after discovering that they received a smaller inheritance compared to their other three siblings. The wealthy widow gave her eldest son, second son and youngest son one share each of her substantial estate. Meanwhile, her daughter received a half-share, and her third son only got $10,000. Her daughter and third son tried to challenge the validity of the will on the basis that their mother’s bipolar disorder had affected her mental capacity to make a will, or that she had made the will under the undue influence of their other three siblings. The Court eventually dismissed the two siblings’ claims, ruling that the will was valid.

Another scenario where an unequal distribution of assets can form the basis of an inheritance dispute is when one or more family members are cut out of the will entirely. Under Singapore law, it is possible to disinherit a family member, i.e. to not leave any part of your inheritance to that family member. This should be stated explicitly when writing your will, and your reasons for doing so should be documented as well, such as the family member’s financial situation or your relationship with him/her. For instance, if one of your two children is very well-off and is more than capable of supporting his/her own family, whereas your other child needs more support financially, you may decide to leave your first child out of your will and leave your assets to your second child entirely.

However, do note that while you can disinherit a family member in your will, if that family member is your spouse or a dependent, he/she may apply to the court for periodical payments out of your net estate, for their maintenance. The term “dependent” is defined by law, and includes the following persons:

Your unmarried daughter(s)
Your infant son(s)
Your son(s) or daughter(s) who are incapable of maintaining themselves

If the court is satisfied that your will does not make reasonable provision for the maintenance of your spouse or a dependent, then the court may order that the periodical payments be made out of your net estate.

Disagreement over survivorship of joint bank accounts or property held in joint tenancy

Another common type of inheritance dispute arises out of disagreements over joint bank accounts or property held in joint tenancy. For joint bank accounts or property held in joint tenancy, where one joint owner passes away, the other joint owner would assume legal ownership of the entire share of the monies in the bank account or the property individually. This is known as the “right of survivorship”. To illustrate this, if a parent adds one of his/her children as a joint account holder of a joint bank account, then after the parent’s death, and pursuant to the “right of survivorship”, that child can claim full legal ownership of the funds.

However, the “right of survivorship” is merely a starting point, and can be rebutted by evidence showing that the deceased intended for the asset to be held in trust or shared among all his/her beneficiaries. This is typically where disputes might arise, between the surviving joint owner and the estate of the deceased joint owner. Where such disputes are taken to court, the court will then try to determine the intentions of the deceased joint owner as to what is to happen to the asset after his/her passing. There are generally two possibilities:

If the court decides that the deceased joint owner intended to gift the asset to the surviving joint owner, i.e. for the surviving joint owner to have the right to the whole share of the asset after he/she passes away, then the court will rule that the surviving joint owner is entitled to the whole share of the asset.
If the court decides that the deceased joint owner did not intend for the surviving joint owner to have the right to the whole share of the asset upon his/her death, then the court will generally rule that the surviving joint owner is only entitled to a share of the asset proportionate to the surviving joint owner’s contribution. For example, for a joint bank account, where the surviving joint owner only contributed 10% of the funds in the account, the court will rule that the surviving joint owner is only entitled the 10%, with the remaining 90% being distributed according to the deceased joint owner’s will or the intestate laws. For joint properties, where the surviving joint owner only contributed 25% of the purchase price, the court will correspondingly rule that the surviving joint owner is only entitled to 25% of the property. In such a situation, the court may order for the property to be sold and the net proceeds of the sale to be distributed in such proportions.

An example of an inheritance dispute arising out of disagreements over property held in joint tenancy occurred in 2023, when three sisters sued their younger brother after their father died. Their father and brother were joint owners of a property that had been used to run the family’s hardware business since 1985. After their father died, their brother was left as the sole surviving joint tenant. When the sisters asked whether the net proceeds of the sale of the property could be split equally among the four siblings, the brother refused, claiming that he was the sole and absolute owner of the property. The main question before the court was whether the father had the intention to benefit the brother at the time the property was purchased. The court found that this was not the case. Among other reasons, the court considered that:

The parents had treated all four children equally, regardless of sex, and did not favour the brother as their only son.
It was unlikely that the father intended for the property to pass solely and absolutely to his son when he died.
It was more likely that the father had intended for the business to continue operating at the property after his death, to support his widow rather than his son.
As for why the father had named the brother as a joint tenant, the court accepted that this was likely to get better terms for a DBS loan, since the brother was the youngest of the family with a stable job and a sufficiently high salary at the time.

As such, the court ruled that the property was held in equal shares for the four siblings.

Disagreement over what to do with an inherited property

The last common example of an inheritance dispute arises out of disagreements over what to do with an inherited property. For example, where a parent wills a property in equal shares to his/her four children, they inherit the property together, and must reach a consensus for any major decisions having to do with the property (including whether to sell the property). However, the four children may disagree as to what to do with the inherited property – two of the children may wish to sell the property and divide up the net proceeds of the sale, whereas the other two children may wish to preserve the family property and not sell it. Even if all the children are keen to sell the property, they may disagree over the manner and price at which to sell the property.

A well-known example is the dispute among the children of Singapore’s founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, regarding whether to demolish the family home at 38 Oxley Road. There were disagreements over what to do with the property, including whether to preserve the property due to its historical significance or to demolish the property. This was further complicated by public interest stemming from the history of the property, leading to questions as to whether the property should be gazetted as a national monument.

What Can I Do in the Event of an Inheritance Dispute Among Family Members?

If you are involved in an inheritance dispute with other family members, there are several courses of action that you can take, ranging from trying to resolve the dispute amicably to taking the dispute to court. The course of action to take would also depend on the complexity of the dispute.

Generally speaking, the less complex the dispute, the more likely amicable modes of resolving the dispute are to succeed. The main courses of action that you can take are discussed below.

1. Negotiation and/or mediation

The first course of action that you can and should consider is resolving the dispute amicably, by negotiation or mediation. The main difference between the two is that while negotiation only involves the parties involved in the dispute (e.g. the family members) or their legal representatives, mediation also involves a neutral third-party, the mediator. Typically speaking, the role of the mediator is to try to facilitate the negotiation, especially when parties are already at loggerheads and emotions are running high, so that the parties involved have the highest chance of coming to a mutually amicable resolution.

Negotiation/mediation process

Negotiations are fairly unstructured, and it is up to the parties involved in the dispute or their legal representatives to reach out to each other to arrange the negotiation. Typical things that would have to be discussed prior to the negotiation are the logistics of the negotiation (e.g. where and when is it happening) as well as the agenda for the negotiation.

On the other hand, mediations are oftentimes more structured. The parties involved in the dispute will typically reach out to a mediation service provider and submit a request for mediation. The mediation service provider will then arrange for an experienced mediator to be appointed (if the parties do not jointly agree to a mediator), and arrange the logistics of the mediation itself. Parties will typically have to pay the mediation service provider a fee for its services. For example, the Singapore Mediation Centre (SMC) administers mediations under its in-house Family Mediation Procedure Rules to help family members resolve their domestic disputes amicably. If the parties go through the SMC and agree to use SMC’s Family Mediation Procedure Rules, the parties will have to pay SMC a non-refundable administrative fee of around S$270 per party and mediation fees of around S$2,800 per party per day.

At the conclusion of the negotiation and/or mediation, if you manage to reach an agreement with the other party, this will be recorded in the form of a written settlement agreement. This agreement would be binding on the parties just like any other contract would be, and would typically also include a clause prohibiting parties from commencing separate claims or pursuing other courses of action on the same subject matter. However, if you do not manage to reach an agreement with the other party, you can always pursue other courses of action.

Pros and cons of negotation/mediation

The pros and cons of resolving your inheritance dispute by negotiation and/or mediation are set out in the table below:

Pros	Cons
Cost-effective and faster than going to court	May not be as effective if parties are already unwilling to compromise. For instance, if the disagreement is over the survivorship of a property held in joint tenancy, and both parties involved in the dispute claim that they should have the whole share of the property, and are unwilling to compromise, then negotiation and/or mediation may not be as fruitful.
Preserves family relationships – the resolution to the dispute will be one that all parties involved are amenable to, and may be “win-win”. In contrast, if the dispute is brought to court, the outcome is typically a zero-sum one, i.e. one party will prevail at the expense of the other. Using the example of the four children disagreeing over what to do with the inherited property, the court will either rule that the property is to be sold, or not to be sold – either way, two children will be disappointed at the end of the process.
Allows for more flexible and creative solutions – As the solutions that can be agreed on in negotiations and/or mediations are entirely in the parties’ hands, the parties can discuss and seek to agree on more flexible and creative solutions that may not be obtainable in court. For instance, using the same example of the four children disagreeing over what to do with the inherited property, it may be uncovered during the negotiation or mediation that the two children want to sell the property because they need money to cover financial liabilities that they recently incurred. The parties may then agree to rent out the property for an agreed period and at an agreed rate, and for the parties to share in the rental proceeds. The two children wanting to sell the property would be able to have an additional constant stream of passive income, whereas the two children wanting to preserve the property would also get to do so.
Confidential – Negotiations and/or mediations are also confidential processes, which would be beneficial if parties do not want their inheritance disputes to be publicised, for fear of airing their dirty laundry in public. Typically, once a dispute is brought to court, it will be publicly accessible.

2. Contesting the validity of the will

If you have attempted negotiation and/or mediation but to no avail, and your inheritance dispute stems from what is written in your loved one’s will, you can consider contesting the validity of the will, provided there are grounds to do so. Contesting a will refers to challenging its terms and/or validity. Whether it is the suspicion that you have been unintentionally disinherited, are not receiving the proper amount the deceased has set aside for you, or that the will was made under duress or other reasons, you may choose to contest the will to stop it from being executed.

Some grounds on which a will can be contested include when:

The will was not validly made;
The will was made by fraud;
The testator did not have the mental capacity to make the will;
The testator made the will under undue influence;
The lawyer who drafted the will made a mistake or misconducted themselves while doing so.

There are reported cases where wills have been successfully contested. For example, in 2010, the Court of Appeal held that a will executed by one Mdm Goh, who had amassed substantial wealth through her property investments, was invalid as Mdm Goh had lacked testamentary capacity at the time she executed her will. The court observed that eyewitness testimonies of what had happened during the signing of the will in 1996 did not suffice to show that Mdm Goh knew and approved the contents of the will when she signed the same. The evidence did not show that the will had been properly explained to Mdm Goh. Furthermore, the court noted that the circumstances surrounding the preparation and execution of the will were suspicious. In particular, Mdm Goh’s favourite child was inexplicably excluded from the will.

Process of contesting the will

The process for contesting the validity of a will depends on whether a Grant of Probate has been issued. This is a document issued by the court to signify that the executor of the will has the legal authority to handle the deceased’s estate according to the instructions in the will. If the Grant of Probate has been issued, you will need to start a probate action. You can do so by filing an originating claim to revoke the Grant of Probate of the will under Part 7 of the Family Justice (Probate and Other Matters) Rules 2024.

For more information, you can refer to our other article on the grounds and procedure to contest a will in Singapore.

Pros and cons of contesting the will

Pros	Cons
Can potentially invalidate an unfair or unlawful will	May be less cost-effective and slower than resolving the dispute by negotiation and/or mediation
Legal certainty – The main benefit is that regardless of how the court decides the probate action, i.e. whether the court finds the will to be invalid or not, the outcome will be certain, and the estate will be distributed accordingly.	May strain family relationships – Ultimately, if the will is invalidated, the current beneficiaries under the will, who would most probably be your other family members, could stand to lose out. This may strain the family relationships. For example, under his will, a man leaves some assets to his siblings. However, upon the invalidation of his will, his estate will be distributed according to the rules under section 7 of the Intestate Succession Act (ISA) instead of the instructions in his will. Assuming that the man is survived by his wife and son, his wife and son will be entitled to one-half of his estate each. The man’s siblings will not be entitled to any share of his assets.

3. Commencing a civil suit against the family member

Lastly, if you have attempted negotiation and/or mediation but to no avail, and your inheritance dispute cannot be resolved by contesting the validity of a will, you may wish to consider commencing a civil suit against the other family members. This may occur in a situation where you and your siblings are clearly entitled to equal shares in the family property under a will. The validity of the will is not in question. Nonetheless, all of you disagree over what to do with the family property. In such a situation, you may have to commence a civil suit to resolve your disagreement. You can ask the court to grant certain reliefs, such as:

An order for your siblings to sell their shares in the property to you;
An order that the property be sold and the net sale proceeds divided; or
An order for your siblings to buy out your share in the property.

Process of commencing a civil suit

The process of commencing a civil suit in Singapore follows the following steps:

You first need to prepare and file an originating claim in court.
The originating claim then has to be served on the defendants (i.e. the family member from whom you are seeking the orders).
The defendants then have to decide whether to contest the lawsuit.
If the defendants decide to contest the lawsuit, both parties then have to file their pleadings. These set out the material facts of the matter that give rise to the claimant’s (i.e. your) cause of action or the defendants’ defence.
Thereafter, parties will go through the document disclosure process, obtaining from each other relevant documentary evidence that is necessary for the deciding of the case.
The parties will then exchange the affidavits of evidence-in-chief of each of their witnesses. These are written sworn statements by the witnesses that will stand as their testimony at the trial, and on which they will be cross-examined.
Lastly, the matter will proceed to trial and the court will decide whether to grant the reliefs sought.

For more information on the above, you can refer to our other article with a step-by-step guide on how to commence a civil suit in Singapore.

Pros and cons of commencing a civil suit

Pros	Cons
Provides a legal avenue to assert your rights	Typically more expensive and time-consuming
Legal certainty – The main benefit is that regardless of how the court decides the civil suit, the outcome will be certain, and the parties will have to comply with the court’s order.	May strain family relationships – As mentioned above, if the dispute is brought to court, the outcome is typically a zero-sum one, i.e. one party will prevail at the expense of the other. Using the example of the four children disagreeing over what to do with the inherited property, the court will either rule that the property is to be sold, or not to be sold – either way, two children will be disappointed at the end of the process.

Tips to Prevent Potential Inheritance Disputes Among Family Members

Preventing disputes begins with proactive estate planning. Here are some practical tips:

Write a clear will: Avoid vague language and ensure your will clearly reflects your intentions.
Communicate your wishes: Have open conversations with your beneficiaries about your plans to manage expectations.
Consider mediation during planning: Involving a neutral third party early can help address concerns and create understanding.
Update your will regularly: Life changes—marriages, births, deaths—can all affect your estate plan. Keep your documents current, so that they always accurately reflect your most up-to-date and latest wishes.

—

Inheritance disputes can take various forms. However, whichever form they take, inheritance disputes are emotionally taxing and can test even the closest families. By understanding the common causes – such as unequal asset distribution, ownership of joint accounts, or disagreement over property use – you can better navigate or even avoid such situations. However, if you do find yourself in such situations, there are different ways by which you can try to resolve the dispute, with different pros and cons for each.

Ultimately, the best approach is prevention. Clear communication and thorough estate planning go a long way in ensuring your legacy brings peace, not conflict.

If you are not sure of where to start, you can speak to a wills lawyer for advice. Apart from providing general advice, the wills lawyer can also help you with drafting a legally sound will, advice on complex family or financial situations, and even facilitate family discussions to minimise future disputes.