A grandfather was being “entirely rational” when he decided to leave his estate largely to his children instead of his grandchildren, a High Court judge has ruled.

Ealing resident Frederick Ward Snr, who died in 2020, left around £500,000 to his son Terry and daughter Susan, while leaving just £50 in cash to each of the five daughters of his deceased son Fred Jnr.

Lawyers for the 91-year-old former soldier said he had been disappointed that his grandchildren had rarely visited him, even when he was unwell in hospital.

The five sisters claimed they were entitled to their late father’s one-third share of their grandfather’s estate.

However, Judge James Brightwell ruled Mr Ward’s will was “entirely rational” based on the “very limited contact” between grandchildren and grandfather in his later years.

Dismissing the sisters’ case Judge Brightwell said: “Some may take the view that, as a general proposition, when a testator’s child has predeceased him, he generally ought to leave an equal share of his residue to that child’s issue. However, the decision not to do so and to split the residue and thus the bulk of the estate between his surviving children can hardly be said to be provision which no reasonable testator could make.”

The sisters’ claims focused on a will that had been drawn up by Mr Ward Snr in 2018. This document, they argued, was “invalid” because their grandfather – who they termed a “frightened, ill man” – had been “coerced” and “unduly influenced” by Terry and Susan to effectively remove their side of the family from the inheritance.

The judge did not accept this argument.

Rejecting the suggestion that Mr Ward did not have “capacity” to make the 2018 will, Judge Brightwell said: “The evidence does not come close to persuading me that it is more likely than not that the 2018 will was procured by the undue influence of the defendants or either of them.

“This does not mean that I cannot understand the claimants’ disappointment at being essentially left out.”