Estate of Moodie

[2025] NZHC 2028

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TAURANGA MOANA ROHE

CIV-2025-470-0105

[2025] NZHC 2028

UNDER

Section 14 of the Wills Act 2007

IN THE MATTER

of validating an unsigned will

IN THE ESTATE

of HILDEGARD LAURA MOODIE

HALIA KATHERINE HADDAD and ANNEKE DONNE MAREE HADDAD

Applicants

Hearing:	On the papers
Counsel:	R L Scott for applicants
Date of judgment:	23 July 2025

JUDGMENT OF JAGOSE J

This judgment was delivered by me on 23 July 2025 at 3.00pm.

Pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

………………………… Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:
Fraundorfer, Tauranga

RE ESTATE OF HILDEGARD LAURA MOODIE [2025] NZHC 2028 [23 July 2025]

[1]    Hildegard Moodie died on 24 April 2025 at Te Puna in the Bay of Plenty. I offer the Court’s condolence to her survivors.

[2]    By originating  application  dated  9  June  2025  brought  without  notice,  Ms Moodie’s daughters, Halia and Anneke Haddad, seek my declaration, under s 14 of the Wills Act 2007, an evidenced document is Ms Moodie’s valid will.

Background

[3]    Ms Moodie made a will dated 26 March 2019, appointing her daughters executors and trustees of her estate. In late February 2025, in anticipation of her demise after a diagnosis of leukaemia, she contacted her solicitors to review her affairs. In clearly deliberate and dispositive contacts over the subsequent six weeks, she progressively instructed their drafting of a new will, adjusting intended gifts.

[4]    The solicitors dispatched a final draft will to Ms Moodie on 16 April 2025. At that point, Ms Moodie only had residual queries about trustees’ powers—updated from her 2019 will, by reference to the Trusts Act 2019—which her solicitors discussed with her the following day. Ms Moodie then said she would arrange for signing. When a solicitor attended on her for that purpose on 22 April 2025 at Waipuna Hospice,  Ms Moodie no longer was in a conscious state. I infer she died without regaining consciousness, at least sufficiently to sign her will.

Without notice applications

[5]    I may determine an application can properly be dealt with without notice only if I am satisfied, here, requiring Ms Moodie’s daughters to proceed on notice would cause undue delay or prejudice to them or the interests of justice require the application to be determined without serving notice of it. Otherwise I must give directions for service and adjourn the application, or dismiss it.1

[6]    I am satisfied, irrespective of the prospective success  of their application,  Ms Moodie’s daughters would be unduly delayed and prejudiced in their intended administration of their mother’s estate if required to proceed on notice and therefore

1      High Court Rules 2016, r 7.46(3) and (5).

determine the application can properly be addressed without notice. If unsuccessful, Ms Moodie’s daughters will be administering the estate in terms of the 2019 will.

Validation of wills

[7]Section 14 of the Wills Act provides:

14     High Court may declare will valid

(1)This section applies to a document that—

(a)    appears to be a will; and

(b)    does not comply with section 11; and

(c)    came into existence in or out of New Zealand.

(2)The High Court may make an order declaring the document valid, if it is satisfied that the document expresses the deceased person’s testamentary intentions.

(3)The court may consider—

(a)    the document; and

(b)    evidence on the signing and witnessing of the document; and

(c)    evidence on the deceased person’s testamentary intentions; and

(d)    evidence of statements made by the deceased person.

[8]Section 14 applies to the evidenced document here, because it:

(1)is a document;

(2)appears to be a will,  in  that  it  appears  intended  to  be  made  by  Ms Moodie and seeks to dispose of property to which she was entitled when she died;2 and

(3)does not comply with s 11 (which relevantly requires the document’s signature by the will-maker to be witnessed by at least two people also signing the document in the will-maker’s presence).

[9]    I may declare the document Ms Moodie’s valid will if I am satisfied the evidenced document expresses her testamentary intentions. As such, her 2019 will

2      Wills Act, s 8(1).

would be revoked.3 The discretion conferred by s 14 is residual only: good reason would be required to refuse an order if so satisfied.4 I am essentially to “evaluate the relevant circumstances and reach a conclusion”.5 I am to take “a robust approach”.6

Does the document express Ms Moodie’s testamentary intentions?

[10]   Ms Moodie’s solicitor, Katrina Hulsebosch, has sworn 10 June and 21 July 2025 affidavits of her dealings with Ms Moodie, annexing correspondence, file notes and time records of her firm’s multiple contacts with Ms Moodie from 28 February 2025.

[11]   Given the circumstances of the evidenced document’s making as explained by Ms Hulsebosch, I am satisfied the document expresses Ms Moodie’s testamentary intentions,7 for disposition of her property.8

Is there good reason otherwise to refuse to make the order?

[12]   I have enquired into the circumstances elapsing between the time Ms Moodie said she would sign the will and her death but, being satisfied there is no indication Ms Moodie sought to resile from her adjusted testamentary intentions, have no good reason to refuse to make the order.

Result

[13]   I declare the original of the document marked “C” annexed to the affidavit of Halia Katherine Haddad affirmed 21 May 2025 is the valid will of Hildegard Laura Moodie. I direct the costs of this application be paid out of her estate.9

—Jagose J

3      Section 16(a).

4      Balchin v Hall [2016] NZHC 837 at [11].

5      Re Zhu (deceased) HC New Plymouth CIV-2010-443-21, 17 May 2010 at [7].

6      Watt v Owston-Doyle [2015] NZHC 1292 at [12], citing Re Feron [2012] NZHC 44, [2012] 2 NZLR 551 at [11].

7      Wills Act, s 14(2).

8      Section 8(1)(b)(i).

9      Wardill v Pasley (No 2) [2017] NZHC 306 at [4], citing Harris v Taylor [2016] NZHC 483 at [16]-[18], in turn citing Re Paterson (dec’d) [1924] NZLR 441 (SC) at 442.