Kerr v Kerr

Kerr v Kerr involved a dispute concerning the validity of a second codicil to a will. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of South Australia. The deceased had intended to replace his son Brian as a beneficiary with his daughter Christine. The primary issue was whether the second codicil accurately reflected the deceased's testamentary intentions. The court considered the deceased's approach to his testamentary intentions, the evidence of the parties, and the circumstances surrounding the making of the second codicil.

The court found that the deceased treated matters concerning his estate and testamentary intentions as matters for his private consideration. The evidence showed that Christine was not consulted about the deceased's testamentary plans and had little understanding of the role of a codicil or the terms of the will. Peter and Brian were also unaware of the terms of the will or the first codicil until the deceased showed them to Peter in late 2011. The court concluded that the second codicil did not accurately reflect the deceased's testamentary intentions and should be rectified.

The court granted the application for rectification and rectified the second codicil by removing the name Brian and inserting in its place the name Christine. The court found that the evidence supported the deceased's intention to remove Brian as a beneficiary and replace him with Christine. The court also found that the deceased's approach to his testamentary intentions was consistent with his private consideration of such matters. The court considered the evidence of the parties and the circumstances surrounding the making of the second codicil in reaching its decision.

The final orders of the court included granting the application for rectification and rectifying the second codicil by removing the name Brian and inserting in its place the name Christine. The court also found that the allegations of misconduct against Peter were without substance and that Anne's draft letter was a genuine entreaty to clear her husband's name and effect a reconciliation. The court considered the evidence of the parties and the circumstances surrounding the making of the second codicil in reaching its decision.