Powell v Dinwoodie

Case [2012] WASC 139


POWELL -v- DINWOODIE [2012] WASC 139



SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2012] WASC 139
Case No:CIV:1091/201121 FEBRUARY 2012 & ON THE PAPERS
Coram:EM HEENAN J26/04/12
16Judgment Part:1 of 1
Result: Grant of probate in solemn form of copy of will dated 16 July 2007 limited until the original or a more authentic copy of that will is proved
B
PDF Version
Parties:CHRISTOPHER RONALD POWELL
KAREN JOY POWELL
GLEN DINWOODIE
KELLY MULDOON

Catchwords:

Probate
Proof of will in solemn form
Lost will
Contents established by copy
Execution of original
Whether will revoked
Presumption of revocation arising from loss of will rebutted

Legislation:

Administration Act 1903 (WA), s 14

Case References:

Cahill v Rhodes [2002] NSWSC 561
Curley v Duff (1985) 2 NSWLR 716
Dalton v Dalton (Unreported, WASC,Library No 970479, 24 September 1977)
McCauley v McCauley (1910) 10 CLR 434
Newell v Weeks (1814) 2 Phillim 224; 161 ER 1126
Orifici as Executor of the Estate of Rosaria Giuseppe Orifici v Orifici [2007] WASC 74
Proud v Proud [2012] WASC 134
Re Langton (dec); Langton v Lloyds Bank Ltd [1964] P 163; 1 All ER 749
Sawyer v McKenzie [2011] WASC 215
Scarpuzza v Scarpuzza [2011] WASC 65
Welch v Phillips (1836) 1 Moo PC 302; 12 ER 824


JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
    IN CIVIL
CITATION : POWELL -v- DINWOODIE [2012] WASC 139 CORAM : EM HEENAN J HEARD : 21 FEBRUARY 2012 & ON THE PAPERS DELIVERED : 26 APRIL 2012 FILE NO/S : CIV 1091 of 2011 MATTER : The will and estate of Robert George Dinwoodie deceased BETWEEN : CHRISTOPHER RONALD POWELL
    KAREN JOY POWELL
    Plaintiffs

    AND

    GLEN DINWOODIE
    First Defendant

    KELLY MULDOON
    Second Defendant

Catchwords:

Probate - Proof of will in solemn form - Lost will - Contents established by copy - Execution of original - Whether will revoked - Presumption of revocation arising from loss of will rebutted

Legislation:

Administration Act 1903 (WA), s 14


(Page 2)



Result:

Grant of probate in solemn form of copy of will dated 16 July 2007 limited until the original or a more authentic copy of that will is proved

Category: B


Representation:

Counsel:


    Plaintiffs : Mr I A Morison
    First Defendant : Mr G P Mohen
    Second Defendant : Mr G P Mohen

Solicitors:

    Plaintiffs : Michael Rogers & Associates
    First Defendant : Civic Legal
    Second Defendant : Civic Legal



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

Cahill v Rhodes [2002] NSWSC 561
Curley v Duff (1985) 2 NSWLR 716
Dalton v Dalton (Unreported, WASC,Library No 970479, 24 September 1977)
McCauley v McCauley (1910) 10 CLR 434
Newell v Weeks (1814) 2 Phillim 224; 161 ER 1126
Orifici as Executor of the Estate of Rosaria Giuseppe Orifici v Orifici [2007] WASC 74
Proud v Proud [2012] WASC 134
Re Langton (dec); Langton v Lloyds Bank Ltd [1964] P 163; 1 All ER 749
Sawyer v McKenzie [2011] WASC 215
Scarpuzza v…

Continue reading Powell v Dinwoodie

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Powell v Dinwoodie [2012] WASC 139
Case
[2012] WASC 139
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Powell v Dinwoodie involved the executors of the estate of John Powell, who died intestate in 2015, and the claimant, Ms Powell, who sought to prove a lost will. The dispute centred on whether a copy of the will, dated 16 July 2007, could be admitted into probate in solemn form, despite the original being lost. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The court was tasked with determining whether the presumption of revocation arising from the loss of the original will could be rebutted, and if the contents of the will could be established by the copy provided. This involved assessing the circumstances under which the original will was executed, the authenticity of the copy, and whether there were any indications that the will had been revoked. The court also had to consider the legal principles governing the proof of wills in solemn form, particularly in the absence of the original document.

In delivering the judgment, the Supreme Court of Victoria found that the contents of the will could indeed be established by the copy provided, as it closely matched a copy held by the claimant's mother, who had witnessed the execution of the original will. The court accepted that the presumption of revocation could be rebutted by the evidence presented, which included witness statements and corroborative circumstances surrounding the execution of the will. However, due to the lack of the original or a more authentic copy, the court granted probate of the copy of the will in solemn form, but limited the grant until the original or a more authentic copy could be produced.

The court's final order was that probate be granted in solemn form of the copy of the will dated 16 July 2007, with the limitation that the grant remains in effect until the original or a more authentic copy of that will is proved.

Orders

Orders of the court

Grant of probate in solemn form of copy of will dated 16 July 2007 limited until the original or a more authentic copy of that will is proved

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.