Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PECULIAR WILL CASE.

MISTAKE OF A TESTATRIX,

IMPORTANT CODICIL DESTROYED,

I J Ea United I’rkss Association ) WELLINGTON, June 13,

The mistake of a testatrix in tearing up an important codicil to her will under the impression that it was invalid led to the matter being brought before Mr Justice Blair for rectification iu the Supreme Court. The will in dispute was that of Maria Louisa Petersen, a widow who died last October, leaving an estate of about £OOOO. In a will dated July 20, 1027, the deceased left £IOOO each to a nephew and niece in Denmark, £2OO to the Auckland Council of, the China Inland Mission, £230 to the Auckland Council of Poona and the Indian Village Mission, £230 fo ihe Sydney Council of the South Seas Evangelist Mission, £SOO to assist students in training at the Bible Training Institute, and the residue to the body commonly known as the Newmarket Church. In a codicil dated September 29, 1928, the testatrix provided that if her niece and nephew could not be found part of their share should be used for Mr Petersen, a_ student at present at the Bible Training Institute “ to carry the Gospel to Denmark,” and she also left £SOO to her attendant, Mrs Page, This codicil she destroyed on October G under the impression that it was of no effect. The executors asked the court to pronounce the will and the codicil valid, and to grant probate of both.

An accountant who drafted the codicil for Mrs Petersen at her request said she signed it in the presence of himself and two other witnesses. She tore it up on his advice, ns a legal friend had told him the document would cause legal trouble. He advised her to call in a solicitor at once to bavc a new codicil properly drafted, but she died before she could do this. Recent communications to her nephew and niece in Denmark had brought no reply, ami the testatrix doubted whether they could be traced.

Xo objection to the granting of probate of the will and the codicil was offered by counsel or the "Newmarket Church.

In deciding to grant probate, bis Honor commented that the attitude of the Newmarket Ghuroh reflected much credit on it, and showed it was imbued with a proper Christian spirit. The old practice ir these cases was to leave the decision on the facts to a jury. Tt was clear Hint the testatrix had no intention of revoking the codicil when she destroyed the document, but did so in order to have it properly drawn. The coats arc to be raid out of the estate-

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19290614.2.86

Bibliographic details

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20743, 14 June 1929, Page 10

Word Count
441

PECULIAR WILL CASE. Otago Daily Times, Issue 20743, 14 June 1929, Page 10

PECULIAR WILL CASE. Otago Daily Times, Issue 20743, 14 June 1929, Page 10

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert