Marriage and wills: why the rule should be reformed

There’s growing pressure to reform this rule, and with good reason. What once made practical sense in a 19th-century legal landscape now creates traps for the unwary, opportunities for abuse, and unintended consequences for families. The Law Commission has recommended abolition. Some in the profession are still cautious; but the momentum for change is clear.

In this article, I’ll explore why now is the time to remove the rule that marriage revokes a Will, and what it means in practice for those of us advising private individuals on their estate planning.

What the Law Says Now

Section 18 of the Wills Act 1837 states that a will is automatically revoked when the Testator marries, or enters a civil partnership, unless it was made expressly in contemplation of that marriage.

That means if your client makes a Will and later marries without updating it, the Will is no longer valid. They will be treated as having died intestate. Unless a new Will is executed post-marriage, their estate will pass under intestacy rules.

This rule is rarely questioned by practitioners; it’s been part of English law for almost two centuries. But its practical impact today can be both disruptive and dangerous.

The Practical Problems

From a day-to-day advisory perspective, section 18 creates three key problems.

1. Unintended Intestacy

Most people don’t realise marriage revokes a Will. If they don’t re-execute a new one promptly, their carefully drafted estate plan is wiped out. That can lead to completely unintended outcomes, especially for those with children from previous relationships, or who want to leave specific gifts to others.

Clients assume that a will is effective until they say otherwise. They are shocked to learn the law says different.

2. A Trap for the Unwary

It’s not just the public that gets caught out. Solicitors must remember to build this advice into all marriage or remarriage conversations. Even experienced lawyers can miss this point when clients remarry years after making a Will.

The rule is also a burden on those who do not marry in haste. Many couples live together for years, make Wills, then marry later for tax or legal reasons. The marriage automatically revokes their Wills, often without either of them realising it.

3. Predatory Marriage

Predatory marriage describes the situation where a vulnerable person, often elderly, sometimes with cognitive impairment, is married by someone seeking financial gain. The act of marriage revokes the vulnerable person’s existing Will. Upon their death, the predator inherits under intestacy rules as the surviving spouse.

The previous Will, often naming children or long-term carers as beneficiaries, is null and void. The family has little recourse.

In practice, section 18 has become a legal mechanism exploited by financial abusers. It wipes out the Testator’s intentions with a single, easily engineered act: marriage.

Why Reform Makes Sense

Calls for reform have intensified in recent years, not only from practitioners, but also from families affected by predatory marriage.

In May 2025, the Law Commission recommended that marriage should no longer revoke a Will. Their position is clear: the rule is outdated, unjust, and no longer reflects modern societal norms or legal priorities.

There are four key reasons the Law Commission supports change:

1. Testamentary Freedom- a valid Will should remain effective unless the Testator chooses to change it. Automatically revoking it on marriage undermines that freedom.

2. Abuse Prevention- abolishing the rule would close a loophole that allows financial abusers to exploit vulnerable individuals through marriage.

3. Modern Families- today, people often marry after long-term cohabitation or second relationships. The assumption that marriage always changes inheritance wishes is no longer realistic.

4. Existing Protections for Spouses- if a newly married person forgets to update their Will, the Inheritance Act 1975 allows the surviving spouse to claim reasonable financial provision. The blanket revocation rule is no longer needed as a backstop.

Objections and Counterpoints

Some lawyers are understandably cautious. A recent Law Society survey found the profession divided on whether to remove the rule. Concerns include:

• Risk to innocent spouses- a spouse could be left out if the Testator forgets to update their Will.

• Transitional complexity- changing the rule could cause confusion, especially for people who assume their old Wills were revoked.

• Loss of a “nudge” to update Wills- marriage is a useful prompt for estate planning, and the rule reinforces that.

But these concerns can be addressed. Spouses have statutory remedies under the 1975 Act. Transitional provisions could clarify when and how the rule change applies. And good legal advice, not blunt statutory rules, should be the mechanism by which clients are encouraged to update their Wills.

What Should Private Client Lawyers Do Now?

Until the law changes, section 18 remains in force. That means private client lawyers must continue to:

• Proactively advise clients that marriage revokes an existing Will.

• Encourage clients to make new Wills immediately after marriage or include “in contemplation of marriage” clauses where appropriate.

• Spot risk factors for predatory marriage, especially among elderly or vulnerable clients whose capacity or understanding may be in question.

• Document advice carefully where clients are remarrying, particularly in blended family situations.

At the same time, firms may want to prepare for reform. If the government adopts the Law Commission’s recommendation, the rule may be repealed soon. This would fundamentally alter a core part of Wills law and change the way we advise clients on marriage and estate planning.

To conclude, the rule that marriage revokes a Will is a relic from another era. It no longer serves the society it was meant to protect. Instead, it causes confusion, disinherits intended beneficiaries, and enables financial abuse.

Removing it won’t create a perfect system, but it will be a significant improvement. It will shift the emphasis from blunt statutory default to active testamentary choice and professional advice and that’s exactly where it should be.

As private client lawyers, our role is to help clients navigate life’s changes and protect their intentions. Reforming section 18 will make that job easier, safer, and fairer, for clients and their families alike.

How Can Forbes Help You

With our deep understanding of the legal complexities surrounding contested wills, we are well-equipped to assist you in navigating will disputes. Our expertise includes addressing concerns about testamentary capacity and undue influence, and ensuring timely, comprehensive responses to legal queries. Whether you are an executor, beneficiary, or legal professional, we can provide strategic guidance to protect your interests and help resolve contentious probate matters efficiently. For more information or to discuss your case, contact our Contentious Probate and Trusts division.