IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE
CIV-2025-404-001039
[2025] NZHC 1176
UNDER The Wills Act 2007 IN THE MATTER OF
The estate of MARARA WALTERS, deceased AND an application for an order declaring a document to be valid will
BETWEEN
RENEE ANETTA WALTERS
Applicant
Hearing: On the papers Counsel:
G Bogiatto
Judgment:
15 May 2025
JUDGMENT OF ANDREW J
This judgment was delivered by Justice Andrew on 15 May 2025 at 4.00 pm
pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules 2016 Registrar / Deputy Registrar
Date: …………………………………….
WALTERS [2025] NZHC 1176 [15 May 2025]
Introduction
[1] The applicant, Ms Renee Walters, has made a without notice application under s 14 of the Wills Act 2007, for an order declaring a document to be a valid will. Ms Walters is the niece of the deceased, Marara Walters,1 who died in Auckland on 16 January 2020.
[2] The applicant seeks an order validating an unsigned document of the deceased, prepared by her solicitors in 2019. She says that this document reflects the deceased’s last wishes, having been approved by the deceased who had given instructions to her solicitor to have the document executed as her final will.
[3] At the time of her death, the deceased was survived by two brothers and two sisters. One of these siblings, Keere Makinihi Rapihana, died after the death of the deceased. The surviving siblings, namely Peggy Angland, Noel Thomas Walters, Matiu Thomas Walters, have all consented to this application.
Application to proceed by way of originating application
[4] I find that it is in the interests of justice that the applicant proceed with an originating application and without notice to any interested party.
[5] Originating applications may be made without notice where a ground in r 7.23(2)(a) of the High Court Rules 2016 applies and when all reasonable enquiries have been made and steps have been taken to ensure the application contains all relevant material.2
[6] In “without notice” applications, all persons affected by the will must have a proper opportunity to be represented in the proceedings, including beneficiaries under the previous will.3 In Re the Estate of Campbell,4 this Court found that the grounds in r 7.23(2)(a) for granting leave were established where all persons who would be
1 For ease of reference, following first mention, I shall use the first names of the relevant parties.
2 Re Kake [2024] NZHC 3570 at [8].
3 Re Hickford [2009] 34 FRNZ 159 (HC).
4 Re the Estate of Campbell [2014] NZHC 1632, [2014] 3 NZLR 706 at [3].
affected by the making of a without notice order under s 14 of the Act were aware of and had consented to the making of the order.
[7] I am satisfied that the solicitors for the applicant here have made all reasonable enquiries and taken steps to ensure that the application contains all relevant material. I further note that all of the…
Continue reading Walters
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Walters [2025] NZHC 1176
- Case
- [2025] NZHC 1176
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue in this case is whether the unsigned document can be declared a valid will under s 14 of the Wills Act 2007. The court had to consider whether the document expressed Marara's testamentary intentions and whether there was sufficient evidence to validate it as her will. The court also needed to determine whether proceeding without notice to the interested parties was appropriate in this case.
The court held that it was in the interests of justice to allow the applicant to proceed with the application without notice to any interested party. The court found that all reasonable steps had been taken to ensure the application contained all relevant material and that all surviving siblings were aware of and had consented to the making of the order sought. The court concluded that the application to proceed without notice by way of originating application should be granted.
In considering the merits of the substantive application, the court found that there was cogent evidence that the 2019 will document reflected Marara's intentions. The court was satisfied that the document was in the form of a will, drafted by a solicitor who had met with Marara and taken instructions directly from her. The surviving siblings had also consented to the application. The court held that the grounds for the validating order sought were made out and granted the application. The court ordered that the document in the form as it appears at exhibit “D” to the affidavit of Mr Willis, solicitor, dated 15 April 2025, is a valid will of Marara Walters. There was no order as to costs.
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.