2 total
Appeal dismissed as appellant failed to establish legal basis for validity of non-compliant testamentary documents.
The appellant appealed a judgment finding that a 2006 Transfer/Deed and Direction did not have testamentary effect, and sought leave to appeal a costs order.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, noting the appellant acknowledged the documents did not comply with the requirements of a valid will under the Succession Law Reform Act and could not identify a legal basis for their validity.
Leave to appeal the costs order was denied as no reviewable error was identified in the application judge's exercise of discretion.
A negligence action against a will-drafting lawyer constitutes an impermissible collateral attack on a grant of probate.
The court considered whether the plaintiffs could pursue a negligence action against a lawyer who drafted a will, after a Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee with a Will (CAETW) had been granted.
The plaintiffs alleged the will failed to reflect the testator’s intentions, resulting in a partial intestacy.
The court held that the action was a collateral attack on the CAETW, which is conclusive as to the will’s validity and contents, and dismissed the action.
The court also addressed the principles of summary judgment, the legal effect of probate, and awarded costs to the defendants.
