Aaron v Griffiths - [2008] WASC 26

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CIVIL

CITATION: AARON -v- GRIFFITHS [2008] WASC 26

CORAM: McKECHNIE J

HEARD: 28 FEBRUARY 2008

DELIVERED : 28 FEBRUARY 2008

FILE NO/S: CIV 1613 of 2006

BETWEEN: COURTNEY AARON
Plaintiff
AND
SHARA GRIFFITHS
First Defendant
JOHN GRIFFITHS
Second Defendant
MARIA ELENA TYLER
Third Defendant
TRENT WILLIAM GRIFFITHS
Fourth Defendant
VICKI ANN HOBBS
Fifth Defendant
STEPHEN JAMES GRIFFITHS
Sixth Defendant

Catchwords:

Wills and probate - Informal wills - Suicide note - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Wills Act 1970 (WA), s 34

Result:

Probate granted

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff:     Mr L A Tsaknis
First Defendant             :     No appearance
Second Defendant         :     No appearance
Third Defendant           :     No appearance
Fourth Defendant          :     No appearance
Fifth Defendant            :     No appearance
Sixth Defendant            :     No appearance

Solicitors:

Plaintiff:     Friedman Lurie Singh & D'Angelo
First Defendant             :     Dwyer Durack
Second Defendant         :     Dwyer Durack
Third Defendant           :     Dwyer Durack
Fourth Defendant          :     Dwyer Durack
Fifth Defendant            :     Dwyer Durack
Sixth Defendant            :     Dwyer Durack

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Banks v Goodfellow (1870) LR 5 QB 549
Gellatly v Curtin [2006] WASC 88
The Estate of Kevin John Hines & Anor v Hines [1999] WASC 111

McKECHNIE J: Can a suicide note be, at the same time, a will reflecting the person's intention as to the worldly possessions they leave behind?
This is the question posed in this unhappy case. Bradley Griffiths was married to Courtney Aaron for 5 months, although they had lived together for 6 years. Unfortunately, the deceased, who was 27‑years‑old when he took his life on 8 September 2001, had unsuccessfully battled with alcoholism all his life. Things came to a head that Saturday night after he had spent all their money at the TAB and at the Wanneroo Tavern. Courtney told him she was going to her mother's house because she was angry he had spent all their money. In the event, she did not stay the night away from home. She returned at 10.45 pm to find that her husband had hanged himself from the pergola. Subsequently, the Deputy State Coroner found that death was consistent with ligature compression of the neck and that he had hanged himself with the intention of taking his own life.
There is no evidence that he did so in the time worn phrase, 'while the balance of his mind was disturbed'. In other words, there is no evidence that he suffered from any psychiatric or psychological problems. Some of his writings, exhibited a degree of melancholia but there is no evidence to suggest he was incapable of forming a testamentary intention.
The deceased left a suicide note which was intended to be found and was in fact found. I am satisfied that he did write it. It is unnecessary to set out more of that note than is strictly relevant to the determination of this case. In the note he says: 'I may choose to take my life but that does not mean…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Aaron v Griffiths

Details

AGLC: Aaron v Griffiths [2008] WASC 26
Case: [2008] WASC 26
Decision Date: 28 FEBRUARY 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Aaron versus Griffiths, the dispute was brought before the court by Aaron, who sought to have a note left by his deceased father, Mark, admitted as a valid will. Griffiths, who was named as the executor in the will, contested the validity of the document, arguing that it was not properly executed as a will. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The central legal issues for the court to determine were whether the note left by Mark could be considered a valid will and whether it was properly executed. Given that the document was not formally executed, the court had to consider whether the circumstances surrounding the note's creation and Mark's intent were sufficient to uphold it as a will. The court also had to assess whether the note could be regarded as a suicide note, which would render it invalid under the law.

The court found that the note was indeed a valid will. It determined that the note, while not formally executed, was intended by Mark to serve as his last testament. The court was satisfied that the circumstances surrounding the creation of the note, including Mark's clear expression of intent and the absence of any evidence suggesting it was a suicide note, were sufficient to uphold its validity. The court's decision was based on the principle that wills do not have to adhere to strict formalities as long as the testator's intent is clear and the document can be considered a testamentary disposition.

The court ordered that the note left by Mark be admitted as his valid will, with Aaron recognised as the executor in accordance with the terms of the note. Griffiths' challenge was dismissed, and the court's decision was final.

Orders