Croft v Sanders [2019] NSWCA 303

Croft v Sanders [2019] NSWCA 303

The lay and medical evidence established, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr Croft did not suffer relevant delusional or hallucinatory beliefs at the time of making the will; his underlying cognitive impairment (dementia) was mild and did not deprive him of capacity to comprehend and appreciate the claims of all his daughters. The form and rationality of the will, from Mr Croft's perspective, and evidence of the solicitor, demonstrated testamentary capacity according to the Banks v Goodfellow criteria.

Parties
First Appellant: Leah Croft; Second Appellant: Esther Croft; First Respondent: Anna Sanders; Second Respondent: David John Sanders
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Contested Probate, Testamentary Capacity, Hallucinations or Delusions Affecting Testamentary Disposition
Succession Contested Probate Testamentary Capacity Hallucinations or Delusions Affecting Testamentary Disposition

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leah Croft

First Appellant

Esther Croft

Second Appellant

Anna Sanders

First Respondent

David John Sanders

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Warwick Croft had testamentary capacity when making will dated 11 October 2013
  2. 2 Whether delusions or hallucinations affected the terms of the will
  3. 3 Assessment of cognitive impairment and ability to weigh the respective claims of children

Ratio Decidendi

The lay and medical evidence established, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr Croft did not suffer relevant delusional or hallucinatory beliefs at the time of making the will; his underlying cognitive impairment (dementia) was mild and did not deprive him of capacity to comprehend and appreciate the claims of all his daughters. The form and rationality of the will, from Mr Croft's perspective, and evidence of the solicitor, demonstrated testamentary capacity according to the Banks v Goodfellow criteria.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellants to pay the respondents' costs