Estate of Hannam [2017] NZHC 1805 (1 August 2017)

Last Updated: 14 September 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CIV-2017-485-606085 [2017] NZHC 1805

UNDER	Section 14 Wills Act 2007
IN THE MATTER	of the Will of MARY MORRISON HANNAM
BETWEEN	GAIL DEIDRE TRAPP AND DAVID GRANT HANNAM Applicants

Hearing:	1 August 2017 (On the papers)
Appearances:	P W Hutt for Applicants
Judgment:	1 August 2017

_{JUDGMENT OF DUNNINGHAM J}

[1] This is an application for an order declaring the document signed on

7 July 2016 to be the valid will of the late Mary Morrison Hannam.

[2] Mrs Hannam was a widow, and died at Timaru on 10 April 2017. She had executed a will in August 2010 which left her estate to her daughter, son and step-son, or if they pre-deceased her, their share would go to their surviving child or children. However, as her solicitor explains, in June 2016 she instructed her solicitor to prepare an amended will to reflect the fact that her step-son had died and to give his share to her step-son’s widow rather than his daughter, who was well off. The will was duly prepared and she attended to have the will signed one week later on

_{6 July 2016.}

ESTATE OF MARY MORRISON HANNAM [2017] NZHC 1805 [1 August 2017]

[3] Regrettably, for reasons unknown, the solicitor and the receptionist who witnessed Mrs Hannam signing the will, omitted to write their signatures, occupations and addresses as witnesses to the execution of the will. They deposed to the fact that this was simply an oversight on their part and that the document dated

7 July 2016, and produced as an exhibit in the application, was intended to be the

deceased’s last will.

[4] Section 14 of the Wills Act 2007 is clearly designed to address such circumstances. It provides:

14 High Court may declare will valid

(1) This section applies to a document that—

(a) appears to be a will; and

(b) does not comply with section 11; and

(c) came into existence in or out of New Zealand.

(2) The High Court may make an order declaring the document valid, if it is satisfied that the document expresses the deceased person’s testamentary intentions.

(3) The court may consider—

(a) the document; and

(b) evidence on the signing and witnessing of the document; and

(c) evidence on the deceased person’s testamentary intentions;

and

(d) evidence of statements made by the deceased person.

[5] Clearly all the requirements of s 14(1) are met, with the failure of the witnesses to sign the will being the relevant non-compliance with s 11 of the Act. I am also satisfied that the relevant document expresses the deceased testamentary intentions.

[6] All persons who have a beneficial interest in the earlier will, being the children of the late Mrs Hannam, and the surviving daughter of the deceased’s step-son, Cherie Joy Hannam, consent to the application.

[7] Accordingly, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make an order declaring the document signed by the deceased on 7 July 2016, to be her valid will, and I make an order to that effect, in terms of the draft order accompanying the application.

Solicitors:

Tripp Rolleston & Co., Timaru