Re Middleton (deceased)

In the matter of Re Middleton (deceased), the court was called upon to determine the validity and contents of a will in the context of the deceased's estate administration. The deceased, Kevin John Middleton, died without a surviving spouse, issue, or parents, and the estate is being administered by the applicant, who asserts that the deceased died intestate. The respondent, Paul Gregory Conomos, the son of the deceased’s de facto wife, contends that a will existed which named him as the sole beneficiary if he outlived his mother. The will, however, has not been located, and the respondent only has a copy, which is now missing.

The central legal issues revolved around whether there was sufficient proof of the due execution and contents of the will, and whether the presumption that a will last seen in the testator’s custody and missing on their death was destroyed with the intention to revoke could be rebutted. The court needed to determine if the deceased died intestate or if the will had been effectively revoked. Given the state of disarray in the deceased’s unit after their death and the absence of the original will, the presumption of revocation by destruction was considered.

The court found that the deceased had indeed executed a will in 2003, which intended to revoke previous wills and name his de facto wife as the primary beneficiary, with the respondent as the contingent beneficiary. The court was satisfied that the deceased intended the document to be his final will at the time of its execution. Despite the missing will and the presumption of revocation, the court held that the respondent had not successfully rebutted this presumption. Consequently, the will remained valid at the time of the deceased’s death. The court declared that the will's contents were as stated in the order, and granted letters of administration to the applicant, subject to certain conditions.