A probate caveat can prevent the Court from issuing a grant of representation while a dispute regarding the Will is resolved. The caveat must be based on a genuine legal dispute, such as concerns about a Will’s validity, the Willmaker’s capacity, the exertion of undue influence or fraud on the Willmaker, or the suitability of a proposed executor or administrator.
However, a caveat is not a means of addressing every concern about an estate. The recent decision of the Victorian Supreme Court in Re the Estate of Farago [2026] VSC 692 highlights the importance of having a sufficient legal interest in the estate when lodging a probate caveat, and in choosing the appropriate legal process to resolve a dispute.
What happened?
The caveator’s mother died in August 2025, leaving an estate worth just over $1 million. Her surviving family included her adult son, a minor granddaughter who was the caveator’s daughter, and an adult stepson.
Under her last Will, made in 2023, the deceased left her son 40 silver bars and the residue of her estate to her minor granddaughter, to be held on trust for her until she attains 18 years of age. Upon attaining 18 years of age, the granddaughter was to receive 25% of her entitlement, with the remaining balance to be distributed to her upon attaining 21 years of age. She made no additional provision for her adult son, from whom she had been estranged for many years. Her earlier penultimate Will, made in 2019, also left the deceased’s son 40 silver bars and the balance of her estate was bequeathed to her granddaughter. The only difference between the 2019 and 2023 Wills was the date on which the deceased’s minor granddaughter was to receive her inheritance.
In December 2025, the executors applied to the Supreme Court of Victoria for a Grant of Probate. Before a Grant of Probate was issued, the deceased’s son lodged a caveat five days after the application had been filed.
To support his caveat, the caveator was required to file grounds of objection explaining why Probate of the 2023 Will, should not be granted. Representing himself, he raised twelve grounds. Most of the grounds of objection concerned assets he believed were missing from the estate or had not been properly identified in the inventory of assets and liabilities accompanying the Probate application. Other grounds concerned alleged abuse and influence over his mother, at the time of her making her last Will. He also explained that he wanted to protect his daughter’s inheritance and recover chattels he believed were missing from the estate.
The executors asked the Court to strike out the caveat, arguing that the son lacked standing to file the caveat and, further, that he had not established a prima facie case, that is, a case sufficient on its face to maintain the caveat.
What the Court decided
The Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Victoria) permits ‘any person’ to lodge a caveat, however, maintaining a caveat requires the person filing the caveat to demonstrate that they have a legal interest in the estate that would be affected by the Grant of Probate or Letters of Administration. In this case, the caveator received the same gift of 40 silver bars under both the 2019 and 2023 Wills. As such, he would receive the same inheritance regardless of whether the Court admitted the 2019 or 2023 Will, to probate.
The Court struck out the caveat because the son lacked standing (the legal interest required) to maintain the caveat. The Court therefore did not need to decide whether his twelve grounds of objection had merit and expressly declined to comment on his concerns about missing assets.
The risks of lodging a probate caveat
The Court acknowledged the caveator’s genuine motives. But a probate caveat addresses a specific question: should the Will be admitted to probate? It is not a general mechanism for resolving family grievances or recovering missing estate assets.
The caveat did not resolve the son’s concerns about missing chattels or protect his daughter’s inheritance in the way he intended. Instead, it delayed the administration of the estate. Disputes of this kind can also increase costs, potentially reducing the funds available to beneficiaries.
Before lodging a caveat, it is important to understand the risks:
- Your concerns may not be considered. Without the necessary legal interest, your caveat may be struck out before the Court examines your objections, as was the case here.
- You may face a costs order. An unsuccessful caveator may have to bear their own legal costs and pay the costs of the estate or other parties. Costs borne by the estate can reduce beneficiaries’ inheritances.
- Estate administration may be delayed. A caveat can hold up the Grant of Probate, delaying distributions to beneficiaries and add to family tension.
- You may lose time pursuing the wrong process. Some estate claims have strict time limits. Pursuing a caveat that does not address your concerns can divert time and resources from a more appropriate claim.
Unsure about whether to lodge a probate caveat?
Before lodging a caveat, speak to the experienced team at iWills Legal. We can help you assess your legal interest, understand the risks and identify the appropriate process for addressing your concerns.
