31 Jul 2008
ARMSTRONG HC WN CIV 2008-435-95
- Citation
- openlaw-81358e64_610f_4bd1_9f11_9e62035f556a.pdf
- Court
- High Court
Evidence established the codicil mistakenly referred to the 1996 will because the drafting solicitor was unaware a 2002 will existed and the testatrix had instructed amendments to her then current (2002) will; that mistake constituted both a clerical error and meant the codicil did not give effect to the testatrix's instructions within s31, so the Court ordered the codicil corrected to reflect the 2002 will and amended paragraph reference.