“[Miss Hughes’] written and oral advocacy were exemplary”

Chambers and Partner UK Bar 2025 

“Ruth is an amazing academic who will go to the ends of the earth for the most obscure point of law.”

“It is an absolute pleasure to instruct Ruth. She engages quickly with the issues and is keen to ensure that she understands the wider implications of an outcome.”

“She is the queen of court of protection work.”

“She has excellent advocacy and her drafting is super.”

“Ruth quickly assesses a matter, focuses on the key issues and provides targeted advice.”

“Her knowledge of legal procedures and technicalities is excellent.”

Chamber and Partners High Net Worth 2022 

“Has a detailed and coherent grasp of a wide range of subjects and can be relied upon to advocate fiercely on behalf of her clients” 

“Its is hard to find a barrister you can trust to get the job done more than Ruth Hughes” 

Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2022 

“Ruth’s knowledge and experience is astounding for her call. She delivers strongly in her advice and advocacy” 

Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2020 

“Her knowledge is exceptional and she turns things around quickly. She’s also very impressive on her feet” 

Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2020 

“She’s technically excellent, but also fully alive to difficult circumstance that many of these cases involve” 

Chambers UK 2018 – Juniors 

“Very hard worker who is an extremely well organised and persuasive advocate. She isn’t afraid to get stuck in, and she fights her clients’ corner hard.”

Chambers UK 2017 – Court of Protection

“She’s got a fantastic knowledge of this area and very much has an eye on the welfare issues. She is really fantastic on her feet. She is really practical and makes sure the protected party is being looked after. She is absolutely in her element in this work.”

The core of Ruth’s practice is contentious probate and family provision claims including claims involving, lack of capacity, want of knowledge and approval, mutual wills and testamentary proprietary estoppel. Ruth frequently acts in relation to administration disputes including the removal of trustees/personal representatives and claims involving allegations of breach of trust/duty.  Ruth often advises in respect of the proper construction of wills and trusts and rectification. Ruth has experience of dealing with trust issues in divorce. She often advises on Inheritance Tax and Capital Gains Tax issues in estates and trusts.

Recent experience includes

• Clarke v Shrewsbury and Atcham Constituency Labour Party [2024] WTLR 67 – this case concerned the trusts holding the culturally significant Morris Hall in Shrewsbury, Shropshire.  In 1934 James Morris, a Labour Party councillor and businessman, settled trusts including over the Morris Hall which he had built for the Labour Party to use.  The case concerned the validity of the trusts including whether they were void because they violated the perpetuities rules.
  CPS v Mone and Barrowman – Ruth (led by Kennedy Talbot KC with Richard Hoyle) undertook the trusts aspects of a £75m Final Restraint Order
• Hopes v Burton [2022] EWHC 2770 (Ch) – Ruth acted for the representative beneficiary in this case concerning the recission of two appointments from a trust on the grounds of mistake. Ruth was instructed by Irwin Mitchell LLP.
• Clitheroe v Bond  [2021] WTLR 449 [2022] EWHC 2203 (Ch)– Ruth acted for the Appellant (led by Vikram Sachdeva QC and Jack Anderson) in this important case on the test for testamentary capacity and in particular delusions.  She was instructed by Irwin Mitchell LLP.
• Re XY Deceased [2021] EWHC 2887 (Ch) – acted for the Appellants (led by Penelope Reed QC) in this appeal of an award under the 1975 Act of an award made to a dependant grandchild – instructed by DWF LLP
• Page v Page [2020] EWHC 394 (Ch) – Ruth acted in this claim to rescind a charge over a matrimonial home put in place as a result of negligent tax advice
• Re Baxendale-Walker – acted for HMRC as a supporting creditor in an application for interim receivers, the well-known debtor was later made bankrupt see [2018] EWHC 1681 (Ch) [2018] STI 1585.
• Quan v Bray [2017] EWCA Civ 405 – a three-day Court of Appeal hearing relating to a divorce. Instructed for the Attorney-General to defend charity. Ruth appeared against Richard Todd QC and Stewart Leech QC and was praised by King LJ for the quality of her written and oral advocacy which was described as exemplary.
• Re Stanley [2014] – a three-day testamentary proprietary estoppel claim. Instructed by Linder Myers LLP
• Zarrinkhat v Kamal [2013] WTLR 1477 – acted for the beneficiary in an adult child claim under the 1975 Act
• Bennett v Petit [2013] EWHC 988 (Ch) – three-day want of knowledge and approval claim. Instructed by Russell-Cooke LLP
• Close v Abaowa [2010] EWHC 1920 (QB) – a five-day fraud trial involving the beneficial ownership of property, resulting trusts and the presumption of advancement
• Re King [2010] EWHC 3939 (Ch) – instructed for the unborn and unascertained beneficiaries of a divorce settlement in an application under the Variation of Trusts Act 1958. Instructed by Withers LLP
• Ruth acted in the Thorner v Major litigation concerning testamentary proprietary estoppel
• Ruth acted for the Official Receiver in the K v A divorce proceedings before Charles J.

Ruth often undertakes work that involves cross-border issues.

Ruth is one of the leading barristers of her level of seniority in Property and Affairs cases, although she also undertakes welfare claims.  Ruth is often instructed by the Official Solicitor for example in statutory gift and statutory will cases and cases involving an element of welfare. Ruth’s experience advising on capital taxation issues, and in drafting wills and trusts is particularly helpful in this area. She has been involved in complex international cases.

Notable cases:

• Re Public Guardians Severance Applications [2023] EWCOP 24 – Ruth acted for the Official Solicitor as Advocate to the Court in this test case where Hayden J gave guidance on the severability of various instructions in lasting powers of attorney
• Re K (Inherent Jurisdiction: Costs) [2021] EWHC 2147 (Fam) – Ruth acted for the Official Solicitor in this case concerning costs under the Inherent Jurisdiction. Victoria Butler-Cole QC acted for the LPAs and Constance McDonnell QC acted for the niece and nephew.
• Re ACC & Others [2020] EWCOP 9 – important decision by the Senior Judge on authorisation to litigate, the need for professional deputies to tender for legal work and the payment of litigation friends. Ruth acted for the Official Solicitor.
• Mundell v P [2019] EWCOP 50 – acted for a professional deputy in a capacity to marry case in which Mostyn J questions whether it is part of the test for capacity to marry for P to know that the core of marriage is for the parties to the marriage to live together and love one another.
• Re CJF [2019] EWCOP 1 [2019] COPLR 262 and [2019] WTLR 633.– acted for the Official Solicitor in an urgent application for a statutory settlement for a minor who was about to die but for whom a statutory will could not be made. The case is particularly interesting as it is the first reported case under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to consider the issue. The Court authorised the settlement prior to the notification of CJF’s biological father.
• Watt v ABC [2017] 4 WLR 24 – acted for ABC’s litigation friend in this case concerning whether a deputy or a personal injury trust was in ABC’s best interests
• Re Jones [2014] EWCOP 59[2016] WTLR 661  – acted for the Official Solicitor in this multi-jurisdictional statutory will claim involving complex taxation issues
• Re E [2014] EWCOP 27 [2014] Med LR 417 [2015] Med LR 417 – acted for the Official Solicitor in this case which involved an injunction to restrain the removal of E from the jurisdiction and the validity of her living will
• Re Meek [2014] EWCOP 1 [2014] COPLR 535 – appeared for the Official Solicitor in this high-profile statutory will and security bond application
• Re AS; SH v LC [2013] COPLR 29 – an application for a deputyship by a professional
• Re MN [2010] WTLR 1719 with David Rees – the first reported case on Sch 3 to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 concerning the abduction of a mentally incapacitated person from the US. Instructed by Lawrence Graham LLP.

Ruth often appears in contentious tax disputes including customs work. She has particular experience of cases concerning bonded warehouses and also business premises renovation allowances.

• Primrose v HMRC (2024) – Ruth acted for HMRC in a capital gains tax dispute concerning an old master.  She cross-examined Sir Timothy Clifford, the former Director General of the National Galleries for Scotland, in relation to a painting by JMW Turner that sold for £27m.  The issue was whether the painting constituted plant in the hands of the National Galleries for Scotland where it had been on loan.  Ruth appeared against Giles Goodfellow KC.
• Coconut Animated Island v HMRC [2024] BTC 551 – Ruth acted for HMRC in this appeal concerned the availability of SEIS relief.  She led Tomos Rees.
• Hoopla Animation Ltd (formerly Daisy Boo and Monkey Too Ltd ) v HMRC [2023] UKFTT 24 (TC) – Ruth acted for HMRC in this case concerning EIS relief.  She led Tomos Rees.
• CHF Pip! PLC v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 383 (TC) [2021] S.T.I. 2727 – acted for HMRC in this appointment case concerning EIS relief in relation to the new risk to capital condition.  Ruth’s advocacy was described as ‘eloquent’.
• Page v Page [2020] EWHC 394 (Ch) – Ruth acted in this claim to rescind a charge over a matrimonial home put in place as a result of negligent tax advice
• Ingenious Games LLP v HMRC [2019] UKUT 226 (TCC), [2019] STC 1851 – with Malcolm Gammie CBE QC et al – Ruth acted for HMRC these valuable and complex appeals concerning the financing of Avatar, Life of Pi and Shaun of the Dead using a GAAP scheme in which she undertook the examination of both witnesses of fact and expert witnesses at first instance.
• London Luton Hotel BPRA Property Fund LLP v HMRC [2019] UKFTT 212 (TC) with Jonathan Davey QC et al – Ruth acted for HMRC in this important capital allowances decision concerning business premises renovation allowances. Ruth cross-examined the chair of CBRE Scotland who was an expert on commercial property development.
• Waverton Property LLP v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 853 (TC) – Ruth acted with Jonathan Davey QC for HMRC in relation to the stay of a business premises renovation allowances case.
• HT and Co (Drinks) Ltd v HMRC with Stephen Nathan QC – Ruth has been involved in both the Tax Tribunal and Judicial Review aspects of this dispute concerning the legality of HMRC’s decision to impose conditions on and subsequently close a bonded warehouse
• Perfect v HMRC [2015] UKFTT 639 (TC) – Ruth was involved in this case which considered the issue of the knowledge required to be “holding” smuggled goods at the duty point for the purposes of liability for excised duty
• Abbey Forwarding (in liq) v HMRC [2015] EWHC 225 (Ch) [2015] Bus LR 882 with Stephen Nathan QC and Sarah Harman – an important decision on when the court will enforce the undertaking in damages given to support the appointment of a provisional liquidator. Ruth acted for HMRC
• Abbey Forwarding v Hone [2015] Ch 309 with Stephen Nathan QC and Sarah Harman – Ruth acted in this appeal in relation to an inquiry into damages following the discharge of a freezing order which clarifies the law regarding the measure of loss.
• HMRC v San Marco London Ltd [2014] UKFTT 712 (TC) – appeared for HMRC in this strike-out application in relation to an appeal to reinstate a trader’s licence to trade duty suspended alcohol

Ruth is an accredited mediator, trained through ADR Chambers

Ruth has mediated several contentious probate and contentious Court of Protection disputes all successfully.

Graduated from Trinity Hall Cambridge, 2006, First class (Bateman Scholar)

Erskine Chambers Prize for Company Law

Called to the Bar 2007, Lincoln’s Inn (Levitt Scholar)

Member of the Attorney General’s A panel

Member of the Judicial Appointments Committee advisory panel

Member of the Equality and Diversity Committee of the Bar Council

Member of the Equality and Diversity Committee of the Chancery Bar Association

ACTAPS

Accepting foreign property on behalf of a child under the Children Act 1989: Re AC (a child) and Hays v Hays – 5th March 2021 – Webinar by Ruth Hughes. Please click here to view. 

How to prepare an application to Variation of Trusts Act 1958 – 29th January 2021 – Webinar by Thomas Entwistle and Ruth Hughes. Please click here to view. 

Capacity to engage in sexual relations – 2nd October 2020 – webinar by Rose Fetherstonhaugh and Ruth Hughes. Please click here to view. 

Settling Contentious Probate – 30th July 2020 Ruth Hughes presents. Please click here to view

The Basics of IHT – 10th July 2020: Ruth Hughes and Arabella Adams recorded a webinar on the basics of IHT. Please click here to view 

Conflicts of Interest and Professional Deputies – 12th June 2020: Ruth and David Rees QC recorded a webinar about conflicts of interest and professional deputies. Please click here to view

Practical Tips for Remote Hearing 5th May 2020: Eliza Eagling asks Ruth to explain her tips for video and telephone hearings during Covid-19. Please click  here to view.

Will Execution during Covid-19 –30th April 2020: Ruth Hughes contribute to Maurice Turnor Gardener’s webinar about relaxing section 9 of the Wills Act with Rupert Ticehurst, Ed Powles and Jessica Henson of Payne Hicks Beech. Please click here to view.

If you would like Ruth to contribute to a webinar/lecture please contact the clerks at clerks@5sblaw.com or our marketing team at marketing@5sblaw.com or by telephone on 020 7242 6201.

Ruth has taught company law on the Bar Vocational Course and has contributed to the Trust Quarterly Review and other professional journals. She has written headnotes for the Wills and Trusts Law Reports. She was also on the editorial board of the Elder Law Journal and a correspondent for Private Client Business. Ruth lectures on all areas of her practice and in particular proprietary estoppel, mutual wills, tax and family provision.

Click here to view Ruth’s Privacy Notice.