A no-contest clause in a will: when an heir who objects loses the share, and when not
A no-contest clause is a provision in a will under which an heir who objects to its probate loses his or her share. The testator seeks by it to prevent a fight after death. The law permits the clause, and the Supreme Court has set its limit: it holds, but it is not enforced against an heir who objected in good faith and on reasonable grounds. This page explains how to draft it, when it works, and when it stays on paper.
"A no-contest clause does not prevent an objection. It prevents an objection with nothing behind it."
Adv. and Notary Igal Mor
What a no-contest clause is
A no-contest clause is a provision the testator inserts into the will, under which an heir who acts against the will, usually by filing an objection to its probate, ceases to be entitled to his or her share. In place of the share taken away, the will determines who receives it.
The idea is simple: to put the heir to a choice. Accept the will as it stands and receive the share. Fight it and lose, and lose what was already given as well. The price of an objection rises, and the number of objections falls.
The clause comes from Anglo-American law, and in Israel it rests on a provision of the Succession Law that allows a testator to make an heir's entitlement conditional.
What the law permits
The Succession Law allows a testator to direct that an heir shall become entitled on the fulfilment of a condition, and also the reverse: that an heir shall cease to be entitled on the fulfilment of a condition or the arrival of a date. The no-contest clause is a condition of the second kind, a condition subsequent. The objection is the event, and the loss of entitlement is the result.
The law adds a default rule: if the testator did not determine who takes in place of the heir who was cut out, the testator's heirs by law take. A clause that did not say where the forfeited share goes is a clause half written, and sometimes it returns the property to exactly those the testator wished to keep away.
Alongside this, the law voids a provision of a will whose performance is unlawful, immoral or impossible. An ordinary no-contest clause is none of these, but the drafting decides.
Succession Law, 5725-1965, section 44 (heir subject to a condition subsequent) · section 43 (heir subject to a condition precedent) · section 34 (an unlawful, immoral or impossible provision). Checked September 2026.
The limit of the clause: the Engelman rule
The Supreme Court considered whether a no-contest clause is valid, and if so, whether it is valid in every case. The answer it gave is a balance: the clause holds, because it advances the testator's wishes and deters baseless claims. But it is not enforced against an heir who objected on reasonable grounds and in good faith, because enforcing it then would block a legitimate examination of the will's validity.
"The no-contest clause holds, but it will not be given effect where the heir raises, in good faith, an objection that is reasonable in the circumstances." (Translated from the Hebrew original.)
CA 245/85 Engelman v. Klein, per Justice (as he then was) Aharon Barak. The quotation is a translation; the Hebrew original governs.
The practical meaning: an heir who objected and whose objection was dismissed does not automatically lose the share. The court asks a further question, whether the objection was reasonable and in good faith. Only if the answer is no is the clause enforced.
CA 245/85 Engelman v. Klein. Checked September 2026.
What counts as a good-faith, reasonable objection
The test is twofold: good faith, which is a state of mind, and reasonableness, which is an objective test. An heir who objected because he sincerely believed the will was forged, but had no evidence at all, may pass the first test and fail the second.
What is examined in practice: whether the heir had preliminary evidence for the claim, whether the claim concerns a recognised defect, such as undue influence, lack of capacity or a formal defect, whether the objection was filed in order to clarify or in order to extort, and whether the heir persisted in it after it proved groundless.
The clause, then, does not prevent objections. It prevents objections with nothing behind them. And that is exactly what the testator wishes to prevent.
How to draft a clause that holds
A no-contest clause written in a single line is a clause easily read strictly or loosely. A clause that holds answers in advance the questions the court will ask:
- What counts as an "objection": only a formal objection, or also a claim against the estate, an application to set aside a provision, or action through another person.
- What happens where the objection is upheld in part.
- What happens where the objection is dismissed but found reasonable and in good faith, in line with the case law.
- To whom the forfeited share passes, and on what conditions.
- Whether the clause also applies to one who claims a "share" by law instead of under the will.
Wording that states expressly that the clause will not be enforced against a good-faith, reasonable objection does not weaken it. It fits it to the case law in advance, and forestalls the argument that it is wholly immoral.
What the clause cannot do
A no-contest clause does not bar the court. It does not prevent an heir from filing an objection, and it does not prevent the court from examining it. If the will is defective, was made under undue influence, or does not reflect the testator's wishes, it will be set aside, and the clause within it will fall with it.
Nor does it apply to one who is not an heir under the will. An heir by law who was cut out entirely has nothing to lose, and the clause does not deter him. In that case the testator needs another tool, for example the grant of a small share that there is something to lose from.
And it does not cure a will not made according to law. An excellent clause in a will signed without witnesses, or drafted by one who benefits under it, is worth nothing.
Succession Law, section 35 (a provision in favour of one who drew up the will or witnessed it is void) · section 67 (filing objections). Checked September 2026.
Other tools for the same aim
The aim of the clause, quiet after death, is sometimes better achieved by other tools, or by combining them.
- Reasons in the will: a short explanation of why the division is unequal takes the emotion out of the dispute and makes a claim of undue influence harder.
- Execution before a notary or proper witnesses: a will properly made, with documentation of the testator's capacity, leaves little room for objection.
- An heirs' agreement in life: where possible, the heirs' consent to the structure of the division while the testator is alive.
- A trust: transfer of the assets to a trustee under fixed rules, so that the division does not depend on a probate order.
A no-contest clause is a deterrence tool. The others are prevention tools. In most complex wills they are combined.
Where a lawyer makes the difference
A no-contest clause looks like a single sentence, but it is one of the most sensitive provisions in a will, because it is triggered precisely when the family is already in dispute and the person who wrote it is not there to explain. Drafting that did not anticipate the Engelman rule, did not say where the share goes, or added a condition the court will regard as immoral, creates the litigation it sought to prevent.
The work here is fitting: the clause to the structure of the family, the drafting to the case law, and the whole will to the complementary tools. Sometimes the conclusion is that the clause is unnecessary, and sometimes that it is essential but must go together with a trust or an agreement.
And an heir who is considering an objection in the face of such a clause needs the same analysis from the other side: whether the claim is reasonable and in good faith, and what is at stake.
In summary
In summary, a no-contest clause is a condition subsequent that the Succession Law permits, under which an heir who objects to the will loses the share. The Supreme Court has held that it holds, but is not enforced against a reasonable, good-faith objection. Its force depends on the drafting: what counts as an objection, where the share goes, and what happens in the intermediate cases. It does not prevent the examination of a defective will, and it is no substitute for a will made according to law.
The work combines succession law, case law and knowledge of the family, and the right clause is the one that never has to be enforced.
Contact us to examine your will, or the objection you are considering, and for information on the steps ahead of you.
What people ask us about no-contest clauses
Is a no-contest clause lawful in Israel?
Does an heir who objected and lost always forfeit the share?
What happens to the share of the heir who was cut out?
Does the clause prevent an heir from filing an objection?
Does the clause apply to an heir who was cut out entirely?
Must the will give reasons for an unequal division?
Which is better: a no-contest clause or a trust?
All pages in the Family and Inheritance department
The separation itself
The divorce processLeaving home before divorceReconciliation or divorceRequest for dispute resolutionDissolution of marriageEconomic abuseRestraining orderBreach of a divorce agreementThe children
Child supportChild support claimIncreasing or reducing supportSupport for a child born outside marriageCollecting support through National InsuranceSpreading a maintenance debtCustody and parenting timeShared parentingThe tender years presumptionChanging a custody arrangementRelocating abroad with the childrenParental alienationDealing with an alienating parentGuardian ad litemSurrogacyPaternity claimThe Youth (Care and Supervision) LawVisual parenting plan builderProperty and agreements
Prenuptial agreementSame sex prenuptial agreementSame-sex marriageNotarised prenuptial agreementDissolution of joint ownershipCareer assets and goodwillSelling the apartment on divorceCommon law partnersInheritance and estate planning
Wills and inheritanceInheritance between same-sex partnersEstate planningWills in estate planningIntergenerational transfer in estate planningTrustsDynasty trustSpecial needs trustInheritance orderProbate orderAgreements between heirsInheritance disputes between siblingsContesting a willNo-contest clause in a willBefore adding a condition to a will, check what it prevents and what it creates
A short consultation meeting in which we examine whether a no-contest clause suits the structure of the family and the assets, how to draft it so that it holds, and which other tools, from an heirs' agreement to a trust, achieve the same aim in a different way.