Roos v Karpenkow No. Scgrg-97-250 Judgment No. S6766

The plaintiff Mrs Roos sought to prove the validity of the will of her mother Vera Hein, and to obtain probate of the will in solemn form. The defendant, Mrs Roos' step-brother, Mr Karpenkow, did not dispute that Mrs Hein executed the will, but claimed that she did not know or approve of its contents. The central issue for the court was to determine whether Mrs Hein knew and approved of the contents of the will. The court found that Mrs Hein had the necessary capacity to make a will and was her usual self on the day she executed the will. However, she was dependent on Mrs Roos and Mr Roos for managing her affairs and for social contact. The will made unequal provisions for the plaintiff’s family and the defendant’s family. The plaintiff did not consult with the defendant before she drew the will up, or inform him after the event that the will had been made. Mrs Hein was not left with a copy of the will and it was not read over to her. Mrs Hein did not make any provision for her relatives in Russia, a matter which she was concerned about in her later years. Mrs Hein also did not allude to the will when asking the defendant, shortly before her death, to send her clothes to relatives in Russia after her death. These circumstances raised a suspicion that the will was not freely made, the contents of which Mrs Hein knew and approved. The court concluded that the suspicions were dispelled by the evidence of Mrs Roos and Mr Roos. The court was satisfied that Mrs Hein knew and approved of the contents of her will. The court granted the plaintiff’s claim and pronounced in favour of the force and validity of the will.