Gaitz v Donovan - [2022] NZHC 2107

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2021-404-1692

[2022] NZHC 2107

UNDER Part 18 of the High Court Rules 2016

IN THE MATTER

of the estate of VILMOS GAITZ

BETWEEN

BILYNDA GAITZ

Plaintiff

AND

JAMES GAVIN DONOVAN and GIZELLA

GAITZ as executors of the estate of VILMOS GAITZ

First Defendants

GIZELLA GAITZ

Second Defendant

Hearing:
17 August 2022 (memorandum subsequently filed on 22 August

2022)

Appearances:

C G Smith for Plaintiff

No appearance for defendants (no steps taken)

Judgment:

24 August 2022

JUDGMENT OF LANG J

This judgment was delivered by me on 24 August 2022 at 3 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date……………

Solicitors:
Mac and Co, Auckland
C G Smith, Barrister, Auckland

GAITZ v JAMES GAVIN DONOVAN and GIZELLA GAITZ as executors of the estate of VILMOS GAITZ [2022] NZHC 2107 [24 August 2022]

[1] This proceeding concerns the ownership of assets that formerly belonged to Mr Vilmos Gaitz (Vilmos). Vilmos died at Auckland on 22 March 2021. He was survived by his wife, Gizella Gaitz (Gizella), and three children including the plaintiff, Bilynda Gaitz (Bilynda).

[2] Vilmos was born in Hungary. He moved to New Zealand in 1956 when he was 18 years of age. Thereafter he lived permanently in New Zealand apart from a period between 1984 and 1996, when he lived and worked in Australia.

[3] Vilmos entered into a relationship with Gizella when he visited Hungary in 2009. He had known her before he moved to New Zealand as she was a distant relative. Gizella joined Vilmos in New Zealand shortly after his return from Hungary. They were married a short time later. Thereafter, contact between Vilmos and Bilynda, his daughter from his first marriage, deteriorated markedly. As at the date of his death, there had been no contact between them for approximately two years.

[4] Between 2009 and 2019 Vilmos and Gizella lived together in a property situated at 9 Coral Crescent, Panmure (the Panmure property). Vilmos inherited this property from a close friend, Mr Otto Kelecseyi (Otto), in 2007. He transferred an undivided one-half share in the property to Gizella in May 2010, just a few months after they were married (the 2010 transfer). He then signed a new will in November 2011 (the 2011 will) under which he gave Gizella the right to remain living in the Panmure property during her lifetime. He also gave her a life interest in his estate.

[5] Gizella and Mr James Donovan, Vilmos’s solicitor, were the executors and trustees under Vilmos’s last will, which he signed on 19 August 2015 (the 2015 will). Under this will Gizella inherited Vilmos’s entire estate. It is not known what assets Vilmos owned at the date of his death.

[6] Vilmos signed a further transfer in Gizella’s favour at or about the same time as he signed the 2015 will (the 2015 transfer). This resulted in his remaining half share in…

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 Gaitz v Donovan

Details

AGLC: Gaitz v Donovan [2022] NZHC 2107
Case: [2022] NZHC 2107
Decision Date: 24 August 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case involves a dispute over the estate of Vilmos Gaitz, who passed away on 22 March 2021. The plaintiff, Bilynda Gaitz, Vilmos's daughter from his first marriage, challenges the validity of certain wills and transfers executed by Vilmos in favour of Gizella Gaitz, his widow, and James Gavin Donovan, his solicitor. Bilynda claims that Vilmos signed these documents under undue influence exerted by Gizella. The court had to determine whether Bilynda had proven her claim of undue influence on the balance of probabilities. The court considered the evidence presented and the legal principles applicable to undue influence claims. Lang J found that Bilynda had established her claim of undue influence in relation to the 2015 will and transfer, as she demonstrated that Gizella had exerted significant influence over Vilmos's life, including his financial affairs and contact with family members. The court accepted that Vilmos's decision to sign the 2015 will and transfer was likely influenced by the pressure exerted by Gizella. Consequently, the 2015 will is void and of no effect. Gizella and James Gavin Donovan hold an undivided one-half share of the Panmure property and Vilmos's remaining assets in accordance with the terms of the will dated 18 November 2011. The court reserved leave to Bilynda to seek further directions and/or orders as necessary to give effect to this judgment.

Orders