My Brother or Sister Wants to Sell Our Inherited Land and I Do Not

The sibling who wants to sell cannot simply put the land on the market: a buyer pays the money to at least two legal owners, and every registered owner signs the transfer. The sibling who wants to keep the land cannot block a sale for ever either, because anyone with a share can ask the court to decide.

One sibling may farm the land; another may live far away and want the value released. The law does not take sides between those wishes; it sets out who decides, and what a judge weighs if the family cannot settle it.

Three facts decide which routes are open: how the land is held, what stage it is at, and whether it belongs to the siblings personally or to a farming partnership.

Two layers of ownership sit on every co-owned title. The legal title, the names on the register, is always held as joint tenants: the Law of Property Act 1925, section 36(2), says no severance of a joint tenancy of a legal estate, so as to create a tenancy in common in land, is permissible. Beneath it sits the beneficial ownership, which decides who gets what. That can be held either way.

The 1925 Act lets a joint tenant sever by giving the others a notice in writing, a step to take with a solicitor because it changes what each family inherits.

The Form a Restriction and the Two Signatures

HM Land Registry adds a Form A restriction of its own accord whenever it registers two or more people as owners, unless they hold the land on trust for themselves as beneficial joint tenants. As the Registry's practice guide on private trusts of land words it, a sale or other dealing by one owner alone that produces capital money cannot be registered without a court order. Where that line sits on your own register is covered in our guide to reading your title and plan.

The reason for it is a rule in section 27 of the Law of Property Act 1925: the proceeds of sale shall not be paid to fewer than two persons as trustees, unless the trustee is a trust corporation. Paying two or more trustees moves each sibling's share off the land and onto the money, so the buyer takes the land free of the family's shares; the legal word is overreaching.

A sibling who disagrees with the executors during the administration therefore has different remedies, aimed at how the estate is run. Our guide to probate and selling land explains what executors can sign and when, and how a deadlock between executors is handled.

Section 11 of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 sets the rule. Trustees must, where they practicably can, ask the grown-up beneficiaries who have a present right to the land what they want. They then act on those wishes where that suits the trust as a whole, and where the beneficiaries are split, on the wishes of whoever holds most of the value between them. In plain words, a sibling with a half share carries more weight than one with a quarter.

The duty has limits. The document that set up the trust can switch it off; trusts arising under wills signed before the 1996 Act took effect are outside it; and other trusts that predate the Act are caught only where a deed brings them in. An old family will is therefore worth reading again before anyone assumes the majority view decides.

Who May Use the Land

Section 12 gives a beneficiary with an interest in possession a right to occupy where the trust's purposes include making the land available for occupation, or where the trustees hold it so as to be available, unless it is unavailable or unsuitable for occupation by them. Inherited farmland is often occupied by one sibling who farms it, while the others live elsewhere.

Section 13 lets the trustees manage that. It allows them to exclude or restrict the entitlement of any one or more, but not all, of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy, though never unreasonably. They can set reasonable conditions on the sibling who does occupy, such as paying the outgoings, and they can require that sibling to make payments by way of compensation to a sibling whose entitlement has been excluded or restricted. One limit protects whoever is already there: the same section bars the trustees from using these powers to remove a sibling who is in occupation, or to make them leave, unless that sibling agrees or the court approves.

• Consult and record. Write down what was discussed and what each sibling wants, with the shares each holds.
• Agree who occupies, and on what terms. Who farms or grazes the land, who pays the rates, insurance, fencing and drainage, and whether any payment goes to the siblings who are not using it.
• Keep the accounts separate. Rent, subsidy and costs for the land are easier to settle later if they are not mixed with anyone's own business.

Unwritten arrangements cause trouble. In Kingsley v Kingsley, described further down, the Court of Appeal held that a sister who stayed on the family land after her brother's death was occupying it in her own right and, having accepted in her own offers that rent was due, had to pay rent for that occupation.

The land a family partnership farms may or may not be a partnership asset. The Partnership Act 1890, section 20, treats as partnership property everything originally brought into the partnership stock or acquired on account of the firm, and says it must be held and applied by the partners exclusively for the purposes of the partnership. The same section adds that where co-owners of land that is not partnership property farm it together and buy more land out of the profits, the new land belongs to them not as partners, but as co-owners, unless they agree otherwise.

Ending the partnership under section 26 ends the whole farming business, not only the argument about one field, which is rarely what a sibling actually wants.

In Kingsley v Kingsley the land was owned by a brother and sister in equal shares but was not a partnership asset, so the Court of Appeal agreed that the partnership rule favouring a sale on the open market did not apply.

• Is there a written partnership agreement, and does it list the land?
• Was the land left to you personally under a will, or bought or brought in for the farming business?
• Whose names are on the title register, and is there a Form A restriction?
• Does the partnership pay rent to the landowning siblings, or use the land without paying?

A buy-out keeps the land in the family and gives the sibling who wants out their money. The usual path is an independent valuation agreed as the basis of the price, then a transfer of the outgoing sibling's share and a change to the register.

What the Court Can and Cannot Order

The leading case is Bagum v Hafiz, decided by the Court of Appeal in July 2015. A mother and two sons owned a house in equal thirds; the mother asked the court to order one son to sell his share to the other. The court held it has no such power: the direct disposal of a beneficiary's interest is not a function of trustees of land. But it upheld an order that the trustees sell the whole property, giving one son the first chance to buy at a price the court fixed, with an open market sale if he did not. A sale to particular beneficiaries, the court said, is merely one example of the trustees' undoubted power of sale.

Kingsley v Kingsley applied the same idea to farmland. Roger and Sally Kingsley, a brother and sister, farmed Lodge Farm at Cottered in Hertfordshire in partnership and owned the land in equal shares. After Roger died in 2015, his executors asked for the partnership to be dissolved and the land sold. The trial judge ordered a sale but gave Sally two months to buy the whole at a price he fixed, failing which the land would go to the open market.

His reasons were about the family. The land had been held so that Kingsleys could farm it; a sale to Sally would keep it that way; and Roger's own concerns, that the farming should carry on and his wife and daughter be financially secure, would both be met. He was satisfied the price could be fixed accurately enough to protect the widow's half, and settled disputed valuation points in the executors' favour. The Court of Appeal's judgment of March 2020 upheld the order as a sale of the whole legal and beneficial interest, not a forced transfer of one share. It added that a court acting under the 1996 Act is not obliged to chase the best price: the risk of selling below value is one factor to weigh, not a bar.

Tax on a Buy-Out Between Siblings

For Capital Gains Tax, brothers and sisters are connected persons: HMRC's manual lists a brother or sister among the relatives who are connected. Section 18 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 then treats a sale between them as made otherwise than by way of a bargain at arm's length, and section 17 replaces the agreed price with the land's market value when the gain is worked out. A family discount therefore does not reduce the outgoing sibling's taxable gain, and a loss on a sale to a sibling can only be set against gains on other disposals to that same sibling while they remain connected. How the gain, the rates and the allowances work is set out in our guide to tax on a land sale.

Section 7 of the 1996 Act lets trustees partition land where beneficiaries of full age are absolutely entitled in undivided shares. They need the consent of each of those beneficiaries, and they may provide for the payment of any equality money, the balancing sum that evens out parts of unequal value, raised by way of mortgage or otherwise. So partition is a route for a family that can agree on it; it cannot be forced on a sibling through section 7.

Land rarely divides neatly: a yard, a barn or the only water supply can make one part worth more than another. A plan for a division needs to settle these points:

• A surveyed plan of each part, clear enough for HM Land Registry to register the new titles, with every new boundary marked.
• Access to every part. Each new parcel needs a way in from the public road, or a written right of way over another part.
• Services and drainage. Water pipes, field drains, ditches and electricity that cross the new boundaries need rights granted in the transfer.
• Fencing and gates. Who puts up the new boundary, who maintains it, and to what standard.
• Any tenancy or grazing licence. A letting over the whole holding needs dealing with as part of the plan, so each sibling knows what their part comes with.
• A valuation of each part on the same basis, so that the equality money can be worked out.

A division is a disposal for tax as well as a change of ownership. HMRC's Capital Gains Manual treats each co-owner who swaps a joint interest for a part of their own as making a disposal. For exchanges from 6 April 2010, sections 248A to 248E of the 1992 Act give a roll-over relief that can defer the gain, but only if five conditions are all satisfied; one is that, once the exchange is done, each sibling is sole owner of a part of the holding, or of one or more whole holdings. Whether a particular division qualifies is a question for the family's accountant before the plan is fixed.

The Civil Procedure Rules, as updated on 1 October 2024, list promoting or using alternative dispute resolution as part of dealing with a case justly, and list ordering or encouraging the parties to use it as part of the judge's management of a case. Alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, covers mediation, negotiation round a table, early neutral evaluation and arbitration.

The turning point was Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council, decided by the Court of Appeal in November 2023. The court held that a judge can lawfully stay existing proceedings for, or order the parties to engage in, a non-court-based dispute resolution process, provided the order does not impair the very essence of the claimant's right to proceed to a judicial hearing and is proportionate to achieving the legitimate aim of settling the dispute fairly, quickly and at reasonable cost.

1. Agree to try. One sibling, or their solicitor, suggests mediation in writing and proposes mediators who handle property or rural disputes.
2. Share the facts first. The title register, the valuation, the accounts for the land and any tenancy, so that the day is spent on choices, not on finding papers.
3. The mediation day. The mediator meets everyone together and then each side privately, testing proposals and carrying offers between the rooms.
4. A written agreement. If the family settles, the terms are signed and the solicitors carry them out.

A judge can only choose between orders the law allows; a mediated agreement can include anything the siblings will accept, such as one sibling keeping the paddock by the house and the others sharing the rest.

Section 14 of the 1996 Act lets the court make any order relating to the trustees' functions, including an order for sale, an order that relieves the trustees of a duty to consult or obtain consent, or a declaration of the nature or extent of each person's interest. It cannot appoint or remove trustees under that section. Section 15 then sets out the matters the court must have regard to.

The court is not bound to order a sale, and it can shape the order to the family, as the first-chance-to-buy orders in the two cases above show.

The Cost and the Pace

A TOLATA claim runs in the civil courts under the Civil Procedure Rules, not the family courts. Mills and Reeve, a law firm, set out the stages in a guide of November 2022: a letter of claim with supporting evidence and then a response under the pre-action protocol, for which it gives 14 days in a straightforward case and no more than 3 months for more complex cases; then proceedings, directions, disclosure, costs budgeting and trial. On costs, it says the general rule of thumb in the civil courts is that the loser pays the winner's costs, under rule 44.2(2)(a).

1. Get the title register and plan for every parcel. Note every name, any Form A restriction, any charge, and any notice of a tenancy or option. Copies can be ordered from HM Land Registry for each title.
2. Pin down the stage. Still with the executors, passed by assent, or already in your names. If the estate is not finished, read the will for any wishes about the land and any restriction on the trustees' powers.
3. Check whether a partnership is involved. Find any partnership agreement and the accounts, and whether the land appears as a partnership asset.
4. Commission one valuation for everyone. A single surveyor, instructed by all of you on the same brief, ends more arguments than two competing reports. Ask for the value as it stands today.
5. Hold a family meeting with the facts on one sheet. Each sibling says what they want and, as importantly, why.
6. Take your own legal advice where interests differ. A sibling who wants to sell and one who wants to buy cannot share a solicitor on the buy-out itself. When one firm cannot act for both sides is covered in do I need a solicitor to sell land.
7. Try mediation before any claim. Then, if nothing else works, the court route under section 14, with a clear view of the costs.

Siblings who agree about one field often disagree about another. Where only part of an inherited holding has development potential, a mixed route lets one part go forward while the rest stays in farming, as our guide to the options for inherited farmland explains.

We agree a price with the family at the outset and write it into an option agreement, set higher than the land is worth today in its present use. The planning work is then ours to pay for and run, at our cost and our risk; on a larger site that spend can reach £300,000. When permission is granted we complete the purchase. Payment is on completion, once planning permission has been secured, and the milestones are set out in the agreement. If permission is refused, the family keeps the land and owes nothing.

• One figure for everyone. The price is written into the agreement as a sum of money before any planning work begins, so every brother and sister, and each of their accountants, works from the same number.
• All the owners sign. Every name on the register signs the agreement, and on completion the price is paid to the registered owners together, as the trustees section 27 of the 1925 Act requires, so each sibling's share passes into the money.
• Your own advisers. The family can use one solicitor together, or a sibling can appoint their own. We work with whichever solicitor and land agent you appoint, and we pay a contribution to your solicitor's and agent's fees, so it costs you nothing to get it done properly. How your legal and agent fees are covered is written into the heads of terms.
• The land stays yours. You keep owning and using it until completion, and the agreement runs on while any planning application or appeal remains undecided.
• No pressure. We are happy to talk it through with the whole family first. Nobody, whether the council, your neighbours or anyone else, hears from us about your land unless you agree. Decisions about land often involve the whole family and can take months, so take the time you need.

This route does not ask anyone to give up the land now: the sibling who wants to keep farming carries on until completion, and the sibling who wants the value released sees a fixed figure in writing. The agreement itself is explained in how option agreements work, and a free desktop review gives the whole family the same plain answer on whether any part of the land has a case.