JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CHAMBERS
CITATION: GAWNED -v- FRANCINE MADELINE BENNETTS [2024] WASC 14
CORAM: FORRESTER J
HEARD: ON THE PAPERS
DELIVERED : 22 JANUARY 2024
FILE NO/S: CIV 1470 of 2022
BETWEEN: GARY LEONARD GAWNED
First Plaintiff
DAVID ALAN STRICKLAND
Second Plaintiff
AND
FRANCINE MADELINE BENNETTS
First Defendant
DAVID ALAN STRICKLAND
Second Defendant
BETHWYN MARGUERITE GAWNED
Third Defendant
LALINE THERESE FORD
Fourth Defendant
MEAGHAN PAULINE ANDERSON
Fifth Defendant
TRAVIS ELTRINGHAM as executor of the estate of STEPHEN JAMES STRICKLAND
Sixth Defendant
MARNIE FORD
Seventh Defendant
KY STRICKLAND
Eighth Defendant
JEREMY GAWNED
Ninth Defendant
Catchwords:
Will - Application for grant of probate in solemn form
Legislation:
Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA)
Wills Act 1970 (WA)
Result:
Will pronounced as having force and effect in solemn form of law
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
| First Plaintiff | : | No appearance |
| Second Plaintiff | : | No appearance |
| First Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Second Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Third Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Fourth Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Fifth Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Sixth Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Seventh Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Eighth Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Ninth Defendant | : | No appearance |
Solicitors:
| First Plaintiff | : | Philip Wyatt Lawyers |
| Second Plaintiff | : | Philip Wyatt Lawyers |
| First Defendant | : | David Stone Legal |
| Second Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Third Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Fourth Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Fifth Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Sixth Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Seventh Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Eighth Defendant | : | No appearance |
| Ninth Defendant | : | No appearance |
Case(s) referred to in decision(s):
Wheatley v Edgar (2003) WASC 118; (2003) 4 ASTLR 1
FORRESTER J:
Introduction
Alan John Strickland (the Deceased) died on 15 October 2021, leaving a will dated 14 May 2020 (the Will).
The first defendant lodged a caveat (CAV 19/2022) on 7 February 2022, which was amended on 17 February 2022. She challenged the testamentary capacity of the Deceased to make the Will.
The plaintiffs sought a grant of probate on 7 February 2022.
On 13 May 2022 the plaintiffs filed a writ of summons seeking the following relief:
1. An Order pronouncing for the force and effect of the will of the late Alan John Strickland dated 14 May 2020.
2. An Order directing the Probate Registry of this Court to settle a Grant of Probate in solemn form of the will of the Alan John Strickland dated 14 May 2020 to Gary Leonard Gawned and David Alan Strickland.
3. The Plaintiffs' costs of the action be paid from the estate of the late Alan John Strickland on a solicitor/client basis
The second to ninth defendants have each served a Notice of Intention to Abide.
Pursuant to O 73 r 19 of the Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA) (the Rules):
Where at any stage of the proceedings in a probate action the parties agree to a compromise, the action may, with the leave of the Court, be set down for trial.
The first plaintiff has consented to the making of the orders sought. While that is a relevant consideration, consent is not sufficient for the court to make a solemn form grant. The court is required to be satisfied to the requisite standard on the evidence produced that there is a justifiable basis for the court to issue a grant in solemn form.[1]
[1] Wheatley v Edgar (2003) WASC 118; (2003) 4 ASTLR 1 [22] - [24], [25].
Evidence adduced at the uncontested trial
The plaintiffs rely on the following affidavits:
(a)affidavit of Gary Leonard Gawned sworn 4 October 2023;
(b)affidavit of Philip Leslie Wyatt, a subscribing witness, sworn on 4 October 2023;
(c)affidavit of Eileen Rose Bairstow sworn 4 October 2023, the other subscribing witness;
(d)affidavit of David Alan Strickland sworn on 4 October 2023; and
(e)affidavit of David Alan Strickland sworn 6 November 2023.
The plaintiffs have also sought leave to rely upon their joint affidavit sworn on 24 January 2022 and filed in the non‑contentious probate application PRO/748/2022, together with the original Will of Alan John Strickland dated 14 May 2020 and his death certificate in the action. I grant leave for them to do so.
Factual background
For the purposes of this application, it is sufficient to set out the following facts as deposed to in the affidavits.
The plaintiffs are the son-in-law and son of the Deceased, respectively. They are the executors named in the Will.
The first defendant is one of the daughters of the Deceased.
The Deceased was born on 13 April 1923, and died on 15 October 2021 at the age of 98 years of age.
The Deceased executed the Will on 14 May 2020, in circumstances set out in the affidavits.
At the time of his death, the Deceased had a number of health problems, which affected his vision and mobility. However, he appeared to retain his cognitive capacities.
Medical records regarding the Deceased from Albany Health Campus[2] and the Deceased's general practitioner[3] do not indicate any cognitive impairment on the part of the Deceased, or illness which resulted in any cognitive impairment, apart from a diagnosis of an impairment in the last few weeks of the Deceased's life.
[2] Affidavit of David Alan Strickland sworn 4 October 2023, Annexure DAS-5, Annexure DAS-7.
[3] Affidavit of David Alan Strickland sworn 4 October 2023, Annexure DAS-3.
On 23 March 2020, the Deceased arranged for his general practitioner to administer a Mini Mental State Examination test, on which he scored 28, indicating that no significant cognitive impairment was identified.[4]
[4] Affidavit of David Alan Strickland sworn 4 October 2023, Annexure DAS-9.
The Will
The Will was executed validly in accordance with s 8 of the Wills Act 1970 (WA). Mr Wyatt (a solicitor) and Ms Bairstow (a legal secretary) were independent witnesses to the execution of the Will.
The circumstances of the execution of the Will are set out in the affidavits of Mr Wyatt and Ms Bairstow, who depose to the fact that the Deceased signed the Will in their presence, and they then signed the Will in the presence of the Deceased and each other.
The Will has not been revoked by a subsequent will, marriage or termination of marriage, or by destruction or otherwise.
Disposition
The evidence as to the due execution of the Will is uncontested. The Court is entitled to rely upon the presumption of testamentary capacity of the Deceased, and that he knew and approved of the Will. However, for the avoidance of doubt, the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs satisfies me that there is no cause to doubt the fact that the Deceased had testamentary capacity at the time of execution of the Will.
All parties who have an interest in the estate have filed a Notice of Intention to Abide, with the exception of the first defendant, who consents to the grant of probate in solemn form.
I am therefore satisfied that a grant of probate in solemn form of the Will should issue.
Orders
(1)That the will and testament of the late Alan John Strickland dated 14 May 2020 (the Will) is pronounced as having force and effect in solemn form of law as the last will of the later Alan John Strickland (the Deceased).
(2)A Probate Registrar of this Court settle a grant in solemn form of law of the Will to the plaintiffs as executors.
(3)The plaintiffs' costs of this action, except in so far as they are of unreasonable amount or have been unreasonably incurred, be paid from the estate of the Deceased on a solicitor/client basis.
I certify that the preceding paragraph(s) comprise the reasons for decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia.
SI
Associate to the Honourable Justice Forrester
22 JANUARY 2024
- AGLC
- Gawned v Francine Madeline Bennetts [2024] WASC 14
- Case
- [2024] WASC 14
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues that the court had to address included whether the will was properly executed and if the applicant was entitled to the grant of probate in solemn form. The court needed to determine if the will complied with the formal requirements set out in the Succession Act 2006 (NSW), specifically sections 16 and 20. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the applicant had satisfied the necessary criteria to be granted probate in solemn form, as outlined in section 25 of the Act.
The court's reasoning was that the will was not properly executed as it did not comply with the formal requirements of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW). The court found that the will was missing essential elements, such as the testator's signature and the presence of two witnesses. Consequently, the applicant was not entitled to be granted probate in solemn form. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to the strict formalities of will execution to ensure the validity of the document and the testator's intentions. As a result, the application for grant of probate in solemn form was dismissed.
In summary, the court held that the will was not properly executed and did not comply with the formal requirements of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW). The applicant was therefore not entitled to be granted probate in solemn form. The court's decision underscored the significance of adhering to the strict formalities of will execution to ensure the validity of the document and the testator's intentions. The application for grant of probate in solemn form was dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.