VALIDITY OF TORN WILL

Chronicle (Levin), 31 October 1946, Page 2

VALIDITY OF TORN WILL

—Press Association

UNUSUAL POSITION ARISES

Bv Telegravh-

WLLLLNUTOIN!, uel. uU. Aii estate with an estimated value of £64,750 was iiivolved in a ease wliich came before the Hqu. Mr. Justiee Pair in the Supreiue Court today, when the Public Trustee, as plaintiff, asked for piobate in solemn form eoncerning the will and codicil of the late Vilheiiu Jensen, or letters of administration in • the estate. It was diselosed that the will and codicil were toru in half. when they were received by plaintiff who was appointed as executor under the will, and a question before the Court was whether the will had thus been revoked. It was said, in the statenient of claim, that the will was dated Mareh 9, 1925, and the codicil May 8, 1929. It was said also that after deceased's death the will and codicil- were received by plaintiff from deceased's solicitor and they were toru into two pieees. Plaintiff "had no knowledge of the circumstances under which the documents were torn. Defendants in the action were the widow, Mrs. Henrietta Prances Jeuseu, of Wellington, and children, Mrs. Elsie Alice Downing, Mrs. Irene Alma McNaughton, Mrs. Ida Alexandra Eton and William Nordane Jensen (all of Wellington), Mrs, Hilda May Munn, of Dargaville, Mrs. Hettie Prances Johns,

of Wanganui, ana unanes ra-nesT jensen, of Sydney. The statements of defence for Mrs. Jensen, Mrs. Eton and Mrs. McNaughton submitted that the backing sheets of the will and codicil when they were received by plaintiff, both bore, in deceased's handwriting, the inseription: "Out of date. V. Jensen, August, 1943." As a further defence it was submitted that the documents were voluntarily revoked by deeeased by tearing them on May 6, 1946. No knowledge of the tearing of the documents was elaimed by the other defendants. It transpired at the proceedings that deeeased had named other persons and institutions in Denmark and New Zeyland as benehciaries. An amount of £250 was mentioned for each of the grandchildren who were not represented at the proceedings. Sums of £500 for a Children 's Home in Aldborg, • Denmark, £100 for a friend in Aalborg, £100 to be applied to the 10 poorest pupils at a school in Aalborg, £300 for the Welling- ■ ton Hospital Board for the maintenance of the children 's ward, and £100 for the Plunket Nursing Home, Wellington, were also mentioned. After legal discussion his Honour ad'journed the case. He directed that tlio Danish Consul should be served on behalf of the eharities in Denmark, the Government of Denmark to be notified if no charity could be idenlified, authorising the Consul to accept service and appointing the Consul, if he consented, to represent the other benoficiaries named as residents of Denmark. It was directed that the eharities in New Zealand and each of the grandchildren should be served. All the beneiiciaries not already joined were made pavties to the action and leave was given to file a joint defence if anv was desired. Leave was reserved for applicatioii to be made in respect of any matters arising from the orders. It was directed tliat statements of defence were to l>e filed by 14 davs after service in New Zealand aiul 28 days in the case of the benehciaries in Denmark.