Meissner v Lindsay [2016] NSWSC 790

Meissner v Lindsay [2016] NSWSC 790

The court found that Mr Meissner did not discharge the burden of proving that the deceased executed the 2010 document as her last will and testament. The evidence, including the lack of an original document, absence of evidence the deceased told anyone about the 2010 will, inconsistencies in the applicant's evidence, and credible contrary evidence (including the deceased's whereabouts on 10 February 2010 and her past statements), made it highly improbable that the 2010 document was executed as claimed. The plaintiff's claims were therefore dismissed.

Parties
Plaintiff: Ladislaus (Joe) Meissner; First Defendant: Pamela Lindsay; Second Defendant: Australian Cancer Research
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment
Outcome
plaintiff's claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Wills, Probate, Family Provision, Evidence, Execution of Wills
Succession Equity Wills Probate Family Provision Evidence Execution of Wills

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ladislaus (Joe) Meissner

Plaintiff

Pamela Lindsay

First Defendant

Australian Cancer Research

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the deceased executed a valid will on 10 February 2010 as her last will and testament
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has proved the existence and due execution of the 2010 document as a will

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Mr Meissner did not discharge the burden of proving that the deceased executed the 2010 document as her last will and testament. The evidence, including the lack of an original document, absence of evidence the deceased told anyone about the 2010 will, inconsistencies in the applicant's evidence, and credible contrary evidence (including the deceased's whereabouts on 10 February 2010 and her past statements), made it highly improbable that the 2010 document was executed as claimed. The plaintiff's claims were therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

plaintiff's claims dismissed

Orders

  • Order that the plaintiff's claims in pars 1 to 4 of the summons be dismissed.
  • Order the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings in relation to the claims referred to in order 1.