Legal Lessons from Maile v Maile [2025] EWHC 2494 (Ch)
A family farm at the heart of a legal battle
A High Court ruling has brought closure to a long-running inheritance dispute over West Hook Farm, a 170-acre mixed farm near Okehampton, Devon. The case offers important lessons for farming families planning succession and for rural professionals supporting them.
In Maile & Maile v Maile & Ors, two grandsons claimed they were promised the farm by their grandmother, who later changed her will. The court ultimately upheld her final wishes, rejecting the claims and ordering the family to vacate the property.
The background
Mary Stevens, who farmed West Hook for decades, died in 2020 aged 96. Her estate included:
- 170 acres of mixed arable and livestock land
- A six-bedroom farmhouse
- Three holiday cottages
- Total value: £2.65 million
Her 2006 Will left the farm to her daughters, Ruth and Sheila, equally. A 2011 Codicil gifted the farm to her grandsons, Steven and John, but in 2016 and 2017, Mary changed her mind and reverted to the original plan.
What was disputed?
Steven and John claimed:
- Their grandmother lacked mental capacity when she changed her will.
- She was unduly influenced.
- She had promised them the farm, and they had relied on that promise to their detriment.
Sheila, as executor and beneficiary, denied all claims and counterclaimed for possession of the farm and damages for unlawful occupation.
The Court’s decision
The judge found:
• Mary had full mental capacity and understood her decisions.
• Her solicitor acted properly and carefully.
• No undue influence was proven.
• No clear promise was made to the grandsons.
• No significant detriment was suffered—especially given the financial support they received.
The court was critical of the family’s conduct, particularly secret recordings and inconsistent evidence. It concluded that Mary had always wanted a fair and equal outcome for both sides of the family.
The outcome
- The grandsons’ claims were dismissed.
- Mary’s final will and codicils were upheld.
- Sheila’s counterclaim succeeded: The family must vacate the farm.
- Ordered to pay:
- £10,000/year for farmhouse occupation
£23,000/year for the rest of the farm
Interest at 3% over base rate
What farmers can learn
This case highlights key points for farming families:
- Put succession plans in writing – and keep them updated
- Avoid relying on verbal promises – they can be costly and uncertain to rely upon in court.
- Keep partnership agreements updated and know what they say
- Consider mediation as early as possible and fully engage in the process, litigation is costly and emotionally draining
- Be clear about who owns what, especially when multiple generations live and work on the farm
Final Thought
Mary Stevens wanted her family to work together and share fairly. Instead, years of litigation fractured relationships and drained resources. For farming families, this case is a reminder that clear communication and proper planning are the best tools for protecting your legacy.
Speak to a specialist
For more information about this article and our agricultural legal services generally please contact our team or request a consultation.
Posted:
