1 Sept 2021
The defendant was substantially successful because he secured the outcome he sought (appointment of an independent solicitor and confirmation as joint executor), costs follow the event, and although plaintiffs' position had some merit the case did not justify an uplift; accordingly plaintiffs were ordered to pay defendant costs fixed at $6,214 with disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
18 May 2018
The 1 June 2017 document was declared the last will because it plainly expressed Mrs Adams' testamentary intentions, was signed and dated by her in the presence of relatives who confirm her capacity and approval, the deficiencies under s11 were formal not substantive, there was no opposition and no material delay, and therefore validation under s14 was appropriate.
9 Jun 2015
Webb Ross McNab Kilpatrick Ltd falls within the will's phrase 'its successor law firm' and the will appoints an individual partner by reference to firm membership; consequently the appointment remains of an individual executor and s 63 of the Administration Act 1969 does not preclude the grant of probate in these circumstances.
8 Jul 2013
The Court was satisfied the document prepared by the deceased's solicitor expressed the deceased's testamentary intentions within the meaning of s 14 of the Wills Act 2007 and therefore declared the document to be the valid will and granted appointment of executors and probate in solemn form.
6 Jun 2013
The solicitor's direct evidence established that the testator intended to appoint the two named principals as executors; clause 3 was a drafting error that failed to give effect to that intention and correction under s 31(1)(b) Wills Act 2007 was justified, particularly given s 63 Administration Act 1969 would otherwise prevent a valid grant.
20 Dec 2011
The court held that Bradley West Ltd is a successor firm carrying on the practice and that the individuals eligible under the appointment clause are the directors of the incorporated firm; that s 63 did not preclude granting probate to an individual selected under the clause because the will appoints an individual not the company or a power to the company's directors to nominate an executor; and that the short form appointment ('two of the partners') is not void for uncertainty given the court's ability to admit external evidence under the Wills Act 2007 s32 and the practical equivalence betw…
10 Dec 2010
Clause 3 was void for uncertainty because it attempted to appoint an unspecified member of a category; however, given the remedial purpose of the Act, the absence of substantive rights being affected, and precedents, the Court may correct the will without service where interests of justice require, by substituting a clause naming the partners of Regent Law at the date of death and directing that one partner prove the will and act initially as trustee, to give effect to the testator's intention.
27 Oct 2010
The appointment clause was prima facie void for uncertainty but the solicitor's affidavit established the testatrix's intention such that s31(1)(b) authorises correction; accordingly the court ordered amendment of clause 2.1 to reflect the testatrix's intentions.
10 Mar 2009
s32 could not be used because the surrounding circumstances at execution did not identify which two partners the testator intended and s32(4) bars use of the will‑maker's testamentary intentions as surrounding circumstances; however admissible evidence (solicitor's affidavit and notes) established with sufficient certainty that the testator intended the firm Wynyard Wood to be executor and s31(1)(b) authorised correction of the codicil to give effect to that intention, so the codicil was corrected to appoint the partners of Wynyard Wood at the date of death as executors.