| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted |
AT MELBOURNE
IN ITS PROBATE JURISDICTION
TRUSTS, EQUITY AND PROBATE LIST
S PRB 2009 14412
IN THE MATTER of the Estate of IOANNIS NIKOLAOU (also known as JOHN NIKOLAOU), deceased
BETWEEN:
| STATE TRUSTEES LIMITED (as Administrator of the Estate of IAONNIS NIKOLAOU (also known as JOHN NIKOLAOU)) | Plaintiff |
| v | |
| ELEFTHERIOS NIKOLAOU | Applicant |
---
JUDGE: | Irving AsJ |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
DATE OF HEARING: | 21 August 2025 |
DATE OF JUDGMENT: | 10 October 2025 |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | Re Nikolaou |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2025] VSC 640 |
---
PROBATE — Application for revocation of grant of letters of administration of intestacy — Where copy of original will found — Presumption of destruction by the deceased animo revocandi must be overcome — Presumption not rebutted — Application dismissed — Re Ionnidis: Gebert v Sarvos [2025] VSC 418, [72]-[82] applied.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Plaintiff | Ms A Bartfeld of counsel | KCL Law |
| The Applicant in person |
Contents
Introduction
Terry’s grounds of revocation
Background
The terms of the 1990 copy will
Relevant legal principles
Terry’s evidence
John Anile’s evidence
Denyse Dawson’s evidence
Consideration
Conclusion
HIS HONOUR:
Introduction
Ianonnis (John) Nikolaou (deceased) died on 22 August 2005. The deceased was survived by his wife, Sofia Nikolaou and his three children, Soula Nikoloau, Eleftherios (Terry) Nikolaou, the applicant in this proceeding, and Spiro Nikolaou.
On 9 October 2009 Sofia was granted letters of administration of intestacy. Sofia was discharged as administrator and trustee of the deceased’s estate on 27 January 2022 with Terry appointed in replacement of Sofia. On 22 December 2023 this Court made orders discharging Terry as administrator and trustee of the estate and appointing State Trustees Limited to replace Terry in those positions.[1] State Trustees Limited is therefore the plaintiff in this proceeding.
[1]Order of AsJ Barrett in Sofia Nikolaou (who brings this proceeding by her administrator State Trustees Limited) vs Eleftherios (Terry) Nikolaou (as the administrator of the estate of Iaonnis Nikolaou, deceased) (Supreme Court of Victoria, S ECI 2023 01749, 22 December 2023).
On 19 March 2024 Terry filed a summons and grounds of revocation of the grant of letters of administration. While discussed in further detail below, in summary, Terry seeks to have the grant revoked on the basis that he seeks a grant of probate of a copy of the deceased’s original will dated 12 October 1990.
The central issue at the hearing of Terry’s application was whether Terry, as propounder of the deceased’s copy will, has overcome the presumption, animo revocandi, that the deceased destroyed the original will. For the reasons given below, I have decided that Terry has not overcome the presumption and that his application for revocation should be dismissed.
Terry’s grounds of revocation
On 19 March 2024 Terry filed grounds of revocation relevantly alleging that since the grant of letters of administration a true copy of the original last known will dated 12 October 1990 of the deceased was located.
Background
Continue reading Re Nikolaou
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Re Nikolaou [2025] VSC 640
- Case
- [2025] VSC 640
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the presumption that the deceased intended to revoke the will by destroying it could be rebutted. The court had to assess if the applicant had successfully overcome this presumption in light of the newly discovered copy of the will. This determination was crucial to deciding whether the grant of letters of administration should be revoked to allow for the administration of the estate according to the will.
In examining the matter, the court applied principles from Re Ionnidis; Gebert v Sarvos, focusing on the presumption that a will is revoked if the deceased destroys it with the intention to revoke it. The court found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to rebut this presumption. The applicant's case relied on circumstantial evidence and did not meet the high standard required to overcome the presumption of revocation. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for revocation of the grant of letters of administration.
The court's decision was grounded in the understanding that the presumption of revocation by destruction was not rebutted by the applicant's evidence. The court affirmed that the respondent's letters of administration remained valid, and the estate would be administered according to the intestacy laws. The applicant was not successful in establishing grounds for the revocation of the grant, and the court's ruling upheld the respondent's position.
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.