7 Nov 2023
The Court was satisfied on the evidence that clause 2(b) contained a clerical error ('husband' instead of 'wife') and that correcting the term to 'wife' was necessary to give effect to the will‑maker's clear testamentary intentions; accordingly s 31 authorises the correction.
1 Sept 2023
The court declared the written will instructions to be a valid will because admissible affidavits from the applicant and the deceased's sister established the deceased's intention regarding the ambiguous one‑third residuary provision (that it was for funeral costs and should be divided equally), and that factual clarification rendered the will sufficiently certain to be admitted to probate; application of s28 was noted but unnecessary to alter the practical outcome.
24 Sept 2021
Applicants proved the legal description in clause 3.3 was entered in error and evidence established the testator intended the Paihia property; under s 31 the court amended the will by altering the legal description to match the residential description in the will.
18 Jun 2021
The South African will contained an unqualified revocation clause which on its face revoked the earlier New Zealand will in full; the 27 November 2017 email did not constitute a valid codicil or satisfy s11 formalities and therefore could not revive or limit the revocation under s17; because the South African will was not ambiguous its plain language governs and extrinsic evidence (the email) could not be used to limit the revocation; the Registrar's refusal to grant probate of the New Zealand will limited to New Zealand assets was correct and the without‑notice review must be dismissed; any…
23 Sept 2019
Clause 5(a) vested in John on the testator's death subject to the life interest of his mother; the ordinary presumption in will construction is that gifts vest on the testator's death unless there are express and clear words creating a condition precedent, and the will's boilerplate machinery clauses do not displace that presumption.
4 Jun 2019
The Court held that residuary beneficiaries of an unadministered estate do not have the requisite proprietary interest in estate land to qualify as "parties interested therein" under s14(6B) Trustee Act 1956; therefore s14(6B) did not apply and the appeal seeking a partition order was dismissed. Even if they had qualified, the evidence did not establish that a partition would be advantageous or provided an adequate valuation basis.
6 Nov 2018
The executor was entitled to be indemnified out of the estate for reasonable costs of $19,408.43 because she acted reasonably and responsibly in bringing and contesting the s66 application to obtain directions, represented an unrepresented opposing interest and sought to expedite resolution of a genuine dispute of construction, such that indemnity from the estate was just.
7 Sept 2018
The Court declined to exercise s 66 jurisdiction because the application sought answers to hypothetical questions in the absence of a live justiciable dispute and an adequate factual matrix; in such circumstances the Court will not grant advisory directions and the application is dismissed.
22 Jun 2018
Clauses 4 and 5 create trusts rather than mere powers because the will uses mandatory trust language ('UPON TRUST','my trustees to dispose'), provides a survivorship obligation after the limited management interest, names multiple trustees and contains indicia of trustee roles (exoneration and professional fees), and contains no gift over; those trusts fail for uncertainty of objects because the will gives no ascertainable criteria or identifiable class for distribution of proceeds after disposal, so the trusts are invalid and summary judgment for defendants could not be granted.
1 Aug 2017
The Court was satisfied the unsigned April 2011 draft will (the Unsigned Will) reflected the deceased's settled testamentary intentions except for clause 5.1 which incorrectly recorded equalised loans; accordingly the Unsigned Will was declared the valid last will under s14 and clause 5.1 was corrected under s31 to record $100,000 to each nephew and $50,000 to each niece; clause 7(b) was also rectified to replace "nieces and nephews and grand-nieces and grand-nephews" with "children and grandchildren" to reflect the deceased's intention to limit the residuary class to the children and grandch…