“AN UNJUST WILL.”

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 2656, 8 November 1923, Page 2

“AN UNJUST WILL.”

“This testator has caused to his executor and his family a great deal of trouble and anxiety really through bequeathing more than he possessed,” declared Sir Frederick Chapman, when delivering a judgment in the Supreme Court on Saturday in connection with a Foxton estate. “He. treated his sons hi a. niggardly way despite the fact that he gave two of them a medical education and annuities, but he has given so generously to charities connected with his church that his estate does not contain money enough lo make good his gifts.” The case was that of John Joseph Kane B'-miessy and Catherine Henorah Hcnnessy against the Public Trustee) a motion that came before ills Honour in March. “I have come to the conclusion that a reasonable measure by way of rectifying or partially rectifying the injustice done by the testator (an injustice which in the case of (he eldest son he recognised when lie made an attempt to rectify it by an invalid will) and at the same time by making a, provision for their miiiiiteiinnpe, which the testator ought to have made, is to order tire following sums to be allowed out of the estate: To John Joseph Kane ITennessy £1,200; to William fjennessy, £400; to James Hcnnessy, £800,” continued His Honour. He ordered that these sums should lie paid in three equal ipstalments, the first being paid as soon as is found convenient, and the others, if feasible, at intervals of six months. His Honour went on to say: “The testator endeavoured to make good the defect in the provision for hjs eldest son, J. J. Hennessy. This he did by purporting to give him £1,500 by means of an inoperative instrument, X cannot accept this as decisive of the amount that I ought to allow as it was probably, like the will itself, made under the belief that his estate would yield all that he imposed on it, in which lie was mistaken. It, however, represents his idea or what is jhst. Even with these allowances, he considered that the will, remained an unjust one, and said it was beyond hTs power to rectify injustice beyond what, the court was following the terms of the statute, authorised to do.