Private Wealth Disputes 2026

Global Overview – Private Wealth Disputes in 2026

The Chambers Private Wealth Disputes Global Practice Guide is, as the name indicates, a truly global practice guide. This Introduction will focus on cross-border international private wealth disputes and highlight the related complexities presented by multi-jurisdictional litigation.

The area of private wealth disputes is rife with challenges, but these challenges also present unique opportunities. Advisers that understand and appreciate the multi-jurisdictional considerations involved in cross-border disputes will be able to assist clients in tailoring innovative litigation strategies.

Each year, private clients become increasingly mobile, and globalisation and technological advances continue to redefine the legal landscape. Advisers must be prepared to carefully co-ordinate rules in different jurisdictions to ensure that advice is not being given in isolated silos and that jurisdictional variations are not overlooked. Moreover, these variations present complications for multi-jurisdictional individuals and families, particularly with regard to transfers of wealth and succession matters. Advisers will need to navigate differing – often conflicting – procedural rules, tax laws, rules of inheritance and treaty considerations in an increasingly litigious society, and where tax and enforcement authorities are becoming more aggressive in scrutinising private wealth structures and transfers. The stakes involved are higher than ever before.

Several considerations and emerging global trends affecting private wealth disputes are discussed further below.

Jurisdictional variations in the legal landscape

Decades of globalisation, combined with the unprecedented mobility of the world’s wealthy, have made it common to have clients whose residences and assets range across multiple jurisdictions. Private wealth disputes more often than not involve two or more jurisdictions, where the parties, their family members and/or their assets are located.

Disputes take different forms globally, and legal advisers must be prepared to adapt. For example, in addition to traditional litigation in court, most jurisdictions recognise alternative dispute resolution (eg, arbitration and mediation). However, the prevalence and enforceability of such alternative dispute mechanisms vary by jurisdiction. Advisers will need to be prepared to counsel clients on the format of dispute resolution that may be most favourable to their circumstances, along with the forum choices available (and related “forum shopping” considerations).

The discovery mechanisms available in connection with private wealth disputes also vary dramatically by jurisdiction, and raise similar forum considerations. For instance, the United States and other Anglo-Saxon jurisdictions typically offer very broad discovery, whereas civil jurisdictions tend to limit compulsory sharing of documents and information.

Furthermore, even the degree to which testimony must be truthful is jurisdictionally dependent. In many jurisdictions, statutes provide that perjury (ie, making a false statement, knowingly, while under oath) is a crime. However, under French law, for example, a defendant in a criminal trial and his or her close family members are not sworn under oath, and therefore any lies or misstatements made by them would not be considered perjury (though other legal consequences may apply).

Private client advisers will also need to be especially aware of different evidentiary privilege systems implicated in private wealth disputes. Most jurisdictions recognise some form of attorney-client privilege, though the contours differ between jurisdictions. For example, many jurisdictions – including Germany, Greece and Spain – generally do not recognise any professional privilege between in-house counsel and clients. The existence of other professional privileges (eg, medical, psychotherapist, accountant and tax adviser privileges) varies significantly by jurisdiction. The United States, among other jurisdictions, recognises relatively broad spousal privileges, including both a communications privilege and a testimonial privilege, while other common law jurisdictions may recognise more limited forms of spousal privilege.

To further complicate questions of privilege, wealthy individuals have increasingly complex affairs, often involving family businesses, and including family offices, legal and tax advisers, and other professionals and fiduciaries. Advisers will need to keep abreast of which privileges exist in any relevant jurisdictions, who owns the privilege, and how any relevant privileges interact between jurisdictions.

Navigating heirship and succession

Increasingly mobile clients, with assets inevitably held across multiple jurisdictions, may also find themselves subject to conflicting succession laws. While some jurisdictions allow for testamentary freedom over substantially all assets, many civil law jurisdictions provide for forced heirship. These competing systems may create flaws in a client’s desired succession planning, allowing an aggrieved heir to challenge a last will and testament or trust structure, and necessitating strategic planning to defend against such claims. For example, preferential tax regimes that appeal to wealthy clients continue to impact global immigration patterns. However, clients who relocate to take advantage of such regimes may risk inadvertently subjecting themselves to forced heirship of their assets.

Complications also arise when a family leader resides in a jurisdiction with forced heirship. Frequently, a family business or family wealth will be located with the family leader in such jurisdiction, meaning that the family wealth structures may be vulnerable to forced heirship, even if held through a jurisdiction with so-called “firewall legislation”. Such jurisdictions provide that the courts therein will not, among other things, enforce forced heirship laws. Nevertheless, in circumstances where assets are located in a forced heirship jurisdiction, the structures may be vulnerable to such forced heirship rules regardless of the fact that legal ownership is held in a firewall jurisdiction.

Succession trends and the Great Wealth Transfer

The trends affecting multi-jurisdictional private wealth disputes are further fuelled by demographic shifts among the population, coupled with the mass transfer of wealth occurring at an unprecedented rate globally in what is being described as the “Great Wealth Transfer”. Over the next two decades, Baby Boomers are expected to transfer unprecedented levels of assets to Generation X, Millennials and Gen Z. It is generally considered the largest wealth transfer in history, with many publications estimating that over USD100 trillion will change hands.

People are living longer than ever before, and women are outliving men. Increased longevity brings about questions regarding testamentary capacity and undue influence. The issue of requisite capacity and lack of undue influence in the preparation and execution of documents such as wills and trusts has become an increasingly important consideration for legal advisers. With increasing frequency, lawyers are ensuring they have evidence of their clients’ requisite capacity at the time of execution, as well as emphasising the importance of planning for a client’s future incapacity, such as with powers of attorney and succession planning.

Increasing lifespans also mean that clients may have multiple marriages and so-called “blended families”. These sometimes delicate family dynamics can give rise to future claims and challenges if certain family members feel that they were not given their “fair share”. Furthermore, increased lifespans when wealth is concentrated with older generations mean that heirs are increasingly impatient to inherit, and with impatience can come aggressive behaviour.

The rise of enforcement actions

The global drive for transparency continues to be a dramatic force of change in the international private client world. Governments are increasingly focused on cross-border arrangements and structures, and have implemented regulatory schemes that require the exchange of tax-related information. Increased reporting and transparency requirements inevitably lead to a rise in enforcement actions across jurisdictions.

Tax authorities around the world tend to view international trusts critically, and tax and financial crime enforcement authorities have turned their focus toward international trusts. Matters in the private wealth sphere that were previously addressed as civil matters are often being prosecuted as criminal matters.

Financial crime enforcement authorities are also casting a wider net to hold accountable so-called “gatekeepers” – trustees, accountants, lawyers and other advisers involved in setting up and managing trusts and similar structures.

The world is becoming more and more perilous for trustees and other fiduciaries, and the deference that courts have historically shown to such fiduciaries is waning. One of the most pressing questions is how a trustee faced with a criminal investigation is to fulfil its fiduciary obligations and administer a trust effectively without increasing the beneficiaries’ – and its own – potential criminal exposure. Defending trustees in criminal investigations requires combined expertise and experience in both criminal defence and trust administration and litigation.

Transparency initiatives and enforcement actions are further complicated in the cross-border and multi-jurisdictional context. Every country has its own money laundering and suspicious activity reporting rules, which can conflict in multi-jurisdictional cases. Furthermore, increased reporting and transparency inevitably lead to increased enforcement that may not be consistent among jurisdictions. For example, private client advisers can expect to see conflicts between tax treatment of wealthy individuals with ties to multiple jurisdictions. Inter-jurisdictional disputes may arise as individuals claim the benefits of treaty protections, preferential tax regimes and other claims based on local laws.

The future

Anticipating litigation can be highly beneficial in increasing the likelihood of obtaining a favourable result (whether through the courts or via a negotiated settlement). The greatest risks in multi-jurisdictional private wealth litigation come from the potential clash of laws and procedures of the different countries, yet these inconsistencies also create opportunities for surprise and victory. The litigation team that truly understands the intricacies in each jurisdiction and appreciates the contrasting cultural forces can exploit the gaps that are created to its substantive and procedural advantage.

Furthermore, understanding and appreciating the cultures (both legal and national) of the various jurisdictions involved in cross-border private wealth disputes is vital, and lawyers who do so will be increasingly valuable, whether in non-contentious planning or in private wealth disputes. Lawyers who function as a team, who respect the intricacies and unique aspects of each legal system, and who recognise that an appreciation of language and culture is fundamental to successful cross-border work will have enormous advantages over lawyers who see multi-jurisdictional planning or litigation as separate silos where each lawyer has responsibility only for their own jurisdiction. The Chambers Private Wealth Disputes Global Practice Guide is designed to help encourage and facilitate such cross-border co-operation.