Can a professional executor charge the estate? Authority must come first

Administering an estate after someone’s death can involve a significant amount of legal and administrative work. Rather than leaving family members to navigate these responsibilities alone, many people choose to appoint a professional as a co-executor, drawing on their experience and expertise to help manage the process and ease the burden at an already difficult time.

A professional executor may do extensive work that benefits an estate. The co-executor, or co-executors, may know that charges are being made for this work and may even receive estimates and invoices without objection. But none of this necessarily gives the professional executor a legal right to be paid.

That is the clear message from Royal Holloway and Bedford New College v QLaw Legal Services Ltd [2026] EWHC 2090 (SCCO).

What is the legal test?

A professional executor must be able to identify a proper legal basis for charging the estate. In broad terms, there are three possible routes:

1. The will contains an effective charging clause, allowing the professional executor to be paid.
2. Section 29(2) of the Trustee Act 2000 applies. Where the professional executor is not a trust corporation, charitable trustee or sole executor, every other executor must agree in writing to the professional executor receiving reasonable remuneration.
3. The court authorises remuneration by exercising its inherent jurisdiction.

If the professional executor cannot establish one of these routes, there may be no right to charge the estate, however valuable or reasonable the work may appear to be. 

What happened in this case?

The professional executor rendered bills totalling £53,187.60 between January and July 2024. The beneficiary challenged those bills.

Before considering whether the amount charged was reasonable, the court had to decide a more fundamental question: did the professional executor have any legal right to charge the estate?

The will did not contain a charging clause. The professional executor therefore sought to rely on section 29(2) of the Trustee Act 2000. That required written agreement from the lay co-executor. The court found that no such agreement had been given. 

The result was that the professional executor had no present right to charge the estate for professional services.

Where did matters go wrong?

The possibility of professional charges had been discussed before the will was made. In December 2019, the testator was told that professional executors would charge for their work.

However, when the will was signed in March 2020, it did not include a charging clause. An expectation that charges would be made had therefore not been converted into an express legal entitlement. 

After the testator’s death, the lay co-executor received an email containing information about hourly rates, but no terms of business. She thanked the firm for providing the email. 

The court decided that this correspondence was not enough. It showed that the lay executor knew about the proposed charges and may have acquiesced. It did not show that the lay co-executor had expressly agreed in writing to the professional executor receiving remuneration.

The distinction is important:

• Receiving information is not agreement
• Acknowledging an email is not agreement
• Requesting an estimate is not agreement; and
• Allowing work to continue without objection is not agreement.

Could the professional executor still be paid?

Possibly. The court did not decide whether to authorise remuneration under its inherent jurisdiction. It left open the possibility of a later application, which could take account of the work actually carried out.

Unless and until such an application succeeds, however, the professional executor’s stated entitlement was limited to reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses. 

Practical lessons for advisers

The judgment has implications well beyond costs proceedings.

For will drafters, any intended right for a professional executor to charge should be clearly and correctly recorded in the will.

For professional executors, the legal basis for charging should be checked before substantive work starts. If section 29(2) is being relied upon, every other executor should give clear written agreement to remuneration for professional services performed as executor.

For beneficiary advisers, entitlement and amount should be considered separately. Before examining hourly rates, estimates or proportionality, advisers should check the will, the identity of the executors and any written agreements about remuneration.

The central lesson is straightforward: authority first, quantum second. Before asking whether a professional executor’s charges are reasonable, establish whether the professional executor was legally entitled to charge at all.