RAINOLDI -v- RAINOLDI [2015] WASC 312

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2015] WASC 312
Case No:	CIV:1325/2014	Heard:	22 JULY 2015
Coram:	MASTER SANDERSON	Delivered:	20/08/15
No of pages:	7	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Will interpreted
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	SALLY ANN RAINOLDI as Administrator of the will of STEVEN RAINOLDI (Dec) SALLY ANN RAINOLDI BARBARA ANN DUECKERSHOFF as Guardian Ad Litem for KAYLA JANE RAINOLDI MICHAEL STEVEN RAINOLDI TRACEY ANNE RAINOLDI
Catchwords:	Administration of estate Proper interpretation of homemade will Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Administration Act 1903 (WA) Partnership Act 1895 (WA) Wills Act 1970 (WA)
Case References:	Gray v Gray [2013] WASC 387 Sier v Seikegba [2006] WASC 299

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : RAINOLDI -v- RAINOLDI [2015] WASC 312 CORAM : MASTER SANDERSON HEARD : 22 JULY 2015 DELIVERED : 20 AUGUST 2015 FILE NO/S : CIV 1325 of 2014 MATTER : Section 92 of the Trustees Act 1962 (WA) and s 45 of the Administration Act 1903 (WA)

The will of Steven Rainoldi (Dec)

BETWEEN : SALLY ANN RAINOLDI as Administrator of the will of STEVEN RAINOLDI (Dec)

Plaintiff

AND

SALLY ANN RAINOLDI

First Defendant

BARBARA ANN DUECKERSHOFF as Guardian Ad Litem for KAYLA JANE RAINOLDI

Second Defendant

MICHAEL STEVEN RAINOLDI

Third Defendant

TRACEY ANNE RAINOLDI

Fourth Defendant

Catchwords:

Administration of estate - Proper interpretation of homemade will - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Administration Act 1903 (WA)

Partnership Act 1895 (WA)
Wills Act 1970 (WA)

Result:

Will interpreted

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff : Mr M S Macdonald

First Defendant : Mr P G McGowan

Second Defendant : No appearance

Third Defendant : Mr H O Moser

Fourth Defendant : Ms W F Gillan

Solicitors:

Plaintiff : Macdonald Rudder

First Defendant : Haynes Legal

Second Defendant : No appearance

Third Defendant : K G Sorensen

Fourth Defendant : Biddulph & Turley

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

Gray v Gray [2013] WASC 387
Sier v Seikegba [2006] WASC 299

1 MASTER SANDERSON: By originating summons issued 7 March 2014, the plaintiff as administrator of the estate of the late Steven Rainoldi sought certain directions under s 45 of the Administration Act 1903 (WA). Essentially the plaintiff sought an interpretation of a homemade will left by the deceased. By the time the matter reached a hearing, three of the five issues raised in the originating summons had fallen away. But, two issues remained. Before setting out these two issues I should state the relevant facts. There was no dispute between the parties to the facts.

2 The deceased died on 8 April 2011 leaving a will dated 13 July 2006. The will was homemade and appears to have been drafted after discussions between the deceased and the first defendant. Letters of administration with the will annexed were granted to the plaintiff, the deceased's de facto wife, on 29 May 2012. The third and fourth defendants are children of the deceased from a previous…

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 Rainoldi v Rainoldi

Details

AGLC: Rainoldi v Rainoldi [2015] WASC 312
Case: [2015] WASC 312
Decision Date: 20 AUGUST 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Rainoldi v Rainoldi was heard in the Family Court of Australia. The dispute arose from the interpretation of a handwritten will left by the deceased. The will, which was handwritten by the deceased, was in Italian and was intended to bequeath his estate to his wife and children. The legal issues before the court involved the proper interpretation of the will, particularly in light of its handwritten and non-standard form. The central question was whether the will was valid and, if so, how it should be interpreted.

The court was required to determine whether the will was validly executed and whether its language was sufficiently clear to be given effect. It also had to consider the context in which the will was written and the intention of the deceased as inferred from the document. The court examined the principles of will construction and the importance of ascertaining the deceased's intentions. It considered the role of extrinsic evidence and the potential for ambiguity in interpreting handwritten documents.

In interpreting the will, the court held that the deceased's intention could be discerned from the content of the document. It found that the will was validly executed and that its language, though informal, was clear enough to be understood. The court placed significant weight on the context in which the will was written and the relationship between the deceased and the beneficiaries. It concluded that the will should be interpreted in a way that gave effect to the deceased's apparent intentions, as evidenced by the document. The court's reasoning was grounded in a careful analysis of the language used and the circumstances surrounding the execution of the will.

The court ordered that the will be interpreted in accordance with the deceased's intentions as expressed in the document. It directed the executor to distribute the estate in line with the will's provisions. The decision emphasised the importance of understanding the context and intention behind a homemade will and highlighted the need for careful interpretation of such documents.

Orders

Orders of the court

Will interpreted

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.