About Vlad Macdonald-Munteanu
Vlad is a senior associate in the Wills, Tax and Trusts team. His expertise lies in the resolution of contentious probate matters. He is recommended in both Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners.
Having trained and qualified at a top 100 law firm before joining Aaron & Partners, he has developed specific expertise in dealing with high value and complex claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) 1975 Act, as well as proprietary estoppel claims. He also acts for clients bringing or defending claims against estates, including challenges or defences to the validity of wills, and estate administration disputes. He regularly advises trustees and beneficiaries in relation to trust related disputes, breaches of trust, claims pursuant to the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 as well as directions applications. He is also experienced in advising clients in respect of equitable claims, including resulting and constructive trust claims.
Vlad’s litigation experience has seen him resolving claims with and without the court’s assistance, for a wide range of clients, ranging from individuals, trust corporations and banks. He has successfully pursued claims in the High Court and Court of Appeal, as well as resolving matters utilising a wide variety of alternative dispute resolution methods, including mediation.
Vlad is a member of ACTAPS (The Association of Contentious Trusts and Probate Specialists).
Examples of cases in which Vlad has been involved include the following:
- Acting for beneficiaries seeking to set aside a will believed to be invalid on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity, lack of knowledge and approval and procured by means of undue influence
- Representing the spouse and sole beneficiary of the deceased’s estate, worth in excess of £4.5m, to defend claims by the deceased’s daughters for reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance Act
- Acting for deputies seeking to challenge the validity of a declaration of trust executed by the protected party on the grounds of presumed undue influence
- Successfully reaching a settlement on behalf of the sole beneficiary of his father’s farming partnership and estate, following a claim by the deceased’s long term co-habiting partner
- Acting for the co-executor and 50% beneficiary of an estate comprising of various farms and complex partnership issues
- Advising trustees with regards to the removal and replacement of trustees
- Assisting personal representatives to interpret various complex clauses in the deceased’s will and trust
- Acting for an adult child in successfully settling a 1975 Act claim, achieving a significant increase to the inheritance due from her father’s £5m estate
Thompson v Raggett and others  EWHC 688 (Ch)
Vlad successfully acted for the claimant, who secured an outright interest in a property, as well as lump sum payment and provision for her costs, totalling in excess of £414,000 from a £1.5m estate for the deceased’s long term partner and co-habitee. The High Court’s decision is significant given that the Supreme Court in Ilott v The Blue Cross  2 WLR 979 indicated that if housing is to be provided by way of maintenance, more likely than not, it will be provided by way of a life interest.
Davies & Davies v Davies  EWCA Civ 463
Vlad assisted to secure the claimant an equitable interest in her parent’s farm, securing a lump sum payment, pursuant to the equitable doctrine of proprietary estoppel. The Court of Appeal’s decision provided clarity on the judicial approach to the interplay between expectation based, and detrimental reliance awards.
Legal 500 2021 Wales Contentious Trusts and Probate
– “Vlad is a rising star in this field and works astonishingly hard for his clients, putting London competitors to shame”
Chambers and Partners 2021 High Net Worth Private Wealth Disputes
– “a very impressive solicitor whose work is always extremely thorough, and a very bright and personable chap”
– “he has really good knowledge, he’s really sound”
Vlad is tenacious in pursuing appropriate legal action and displays the utmost professionalism in his work. His manner is totally supportive, with the constructive approach evidenced by him throughout our interactions, resulting in a n excellent conclusion for all concerned. His conscientious efforts have been much appreciated.