Estate of Jefferies [2014] NZHC 1996 (22 August 2014)

Last Updated: 21 October 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CIV-2014-485-5651 [2014] NZHC 1996

IN THE MATTER	of the Estate of MICHELLE JEAN JEFFERIES
AND	of s 14 of the Wills Act 2007
AND	of an application by SHARLENE PATRICIA JEFFERIES Applicant

Hearing:	21 August 2014
Counsel:	J E Elliott for Applicant No appearances for any other parties
Judgment:	22 August 2014

_{JUDGMENT OF WILLIAMS J}

[1] The applicant seeks validation of a document as a will pursuant to s 14 of the Wills Act 2007 (the Act). The document in question is dated 12 January 2014, a short time before the deceased’s death at some time between 13 and 15 January

2014. The document is, in nature, a suicide note. It records in clear and lucid fashion the wishes of the deceased with respect to the disposal of her estate. It charges her sister (the applicant in this case) with responsibility for carrying these wishes into effect. The document is signed by the deceased and a note is recorded in her handwriting as follows:

I am of sane mind as I declare my wishes as I depart this earth to my sister Sharlene Patricia Jefferies to carry out as instructed. I have no previous legal wills and wish for this letter to be my instruction upon my death.

[2] The letter contains clear directions as to the distribution of the proceeds of the

deceased’s life insurance policy, her interests in two companies, and her personal

_effects.

ESTATE OF MICHELLE JEAN JEFFERIES [2014] NZHC 1996 [22 August 2014]

[3] Section 11 of the Act sets out the formal requirements for a valid will. The document in question here does not satisfy those requirements, most particularly because it is not attested by two witnesses, each together and in the presence of the deceased when signing.

[4] Section 14 of the Act gives this Court discretion to declare the document a valid will if it is satisfied that it expresses the deceased’s person testamentary intentions. Before that provision is engaged, the Court must be satisfied that the document:

(a) appears to be a will;

(b) does not comply with s 11; and

(c) came into existence in or out of New Zealand. [5] These requirements are met.

[6] Before the matter coming before me, Simon France J directed that persons with an interest in the estate of the deceased on intestacy be served with the application by Sharlene Jefferies. Service was variously effected on the children and former partner or boyfriend of the deceased. Service was also required to be effected on parties receiving benefit under the document the subject of this application. They too were served. I list all served parties as follows:

(a) Nicole Lee Ashworth;

(b) Damon John Patrick Ashworth; (c) Justin Karl Ashworth;

(d) Kathleen Marama Farrell; (e) Agnetha Grove;

(f) Jenny Balfour;

(g) Ozanam House Trustee; and

(h) Mark Farrow.

[7] It follows that all who may be interested in this application are aware of it. Some communications have been received but no party has expressed any interest in contesting the application and there were no appearances before me today other than Mr Elliott.

[8] I am satisfied that the document in question unquestionably expresses the testamentary intentions of Michelle Jean Jefferies. It was prepared close to her death and in expectation of it. It is written in lucid but heartfelt terms. It reflects the fact that the maker of the document gave considerable thought both to the impact of her impending demise, and the interests of those to whom she made dispositions and requests.

[9] There can be no doubt that s 14 of the Act is satisfied.

[10] I make an order declaring the document I have described to be the valid will of Michelle Jean Jefferies accordingly.

[11] The reasonable costs (including disbursements) of the application are to be met from the estate.

Williams J