New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Validation of informal wills

Legal area

Court

10 Nov 2023

ESTATE OF TUI WENDT [2023] NZHC 3179

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3179
Court

High Court

On the balance of probabilities the document reflected the deceased's testamentary intentions and she had capacity when it was made as evidenced by two medical certificates and the solicitor's contemporaneous observations; the failure of witnesses to sign in the will-maker's presence did not undermine those intentions, therefore the Court declares the document a valid will under s14 of the Wills Act 2007.
6 Oct 2022

KHAN &PEACOCK v KNOX & ORS [2022] NZHC 2577

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2577
Court

High Court

On balance of probabilities the applicants failed to establish that either the 2016 electronic draft Will or the 2017 handwritten note reflected Ms Peacock's testamentary intentions at the time of her death: material intervening events (births of grandchildren), four years' delay, failure to formalise despite knowledge of formalities, inconsistency with earlier testamentary pattern and plausible alternative explanations (haste/emotion, continued close relationship with Saleem) meant the court was not satisfied the documents should be validated.
25 Feb 2022

RE ESTATE OF PHILIP HOLT [2022] NZHC 280

Citation

[2022] NZHC 280
Court

High Court

The Court was satisfied on cogent evidence (recorded instructions, draft consistent with those instructions, and consent of interested beneficiaries) that the draft document expressed the deceased's testamentary intentions and therefore, under s14(2) of the Wills Act 2007, it was declared valid despite non-compliance with s11 formalities.
19 Nov 2021

RE ESTATE OF SUPRA [2021] NZHC 3138

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3138
Court

High Court

The Court declared the document to be the valid will because it clearly expressed the deceased's testamentary intention and that statutory test under s 14 Wills Act 2007 was satisfied by the document, the signature and corroborating witness affidavit, and there was no evidence of any earlier will or entitled child to oppose the declaration.
17 Feb 2021

Re Estate BRUSS [2021] NZHC 191

Citation

[2021] NZHC 191
Court

High Court

Although the document did not comply with s 11 because it was unwitnessed and undated, the totality of the evidence showed the deceased had testamentary capacity, had made considered specific bequests, signed the document and intended it to operate as her will; accordingly under s 14 the Court declared the document to express her testamentary intentions and validated it, leaving any undisposed residue to be distributed under the Administration Act 1969 intestacy provisions.
7 Aug 2020

Alexander [2020] NZHC 1978

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1978
Court

High Court

Leave to proceed by originating application without notice was declined and the s14 declaration refused because of material procedural defects: the will did not comply with s11(4) witnessing formalities, the sibling consents were to a different form of relief (letters of administration with will annexed) and the without‑notice application failed mandatory r7.23/form G32 certification requirements; although the overseas affidavit was ultimately acceptable under r9.86, that did not cure the other defects. The applicant was directed to resubmit properly drafted and certified documentation.
13 Mar 2015

RE: JOSEPH ROONEY [2015] NZHC 461

Citation

[2015] NZHC 461
Court

High Court

Applying s 14 Wills Act 2007, the Court found the September 2009 document and the two subsequent instruments were intended as a will and codicils, were created in New Zealand and on the face of the documents and affidavit evidence expressed the deceased's testamentary intentions; accordingly the Court declared them to be the valid will and codicils despite non‑compliance with s 11.
22 Aug 2014

ESTATE OF MICHELLE JEAN JEFFERIES [2014] NZHC 1996

Citation

[2014] NZHC 1996
Court

High Court

The Court declared the document to be the valid will under s14 because it plainly expressed the deceased's testamentary intentions, was made in expectation of death and in lucid terms, the statutory preconditions of s14 were met, and there was no opposition from served interested parties.