Wild v Meduri

• 1. SUCCESSION — contested probate — testamentary capacity — lack of knowledge and approval — where primary judge’s findings were predicated upon his view of the credibility of the witnesses assessed in the context of the whole body of evidence including contemporaneous medical records and the views of joint experts — Fox v Percy — where lay evidence was diametrically opposed — where no contemporaneous file notes made by the solicitor who prepared the will
• 1. LEGAL PRACTITIONERS — solicitors — whether the primary judge erred in his assessment of the evidence of the solicitor who prepared the will on the basis that the solicitor was also the solicitor on record for the Respondents — where the primary judge held that the solicitor should have ceased to act earlier than he did
• 1. APPEALS — from findings of fact — inferences from primary facts — Jones v Dunkel inference — where a witness swore affidavits in support of the Respondents’ case but was not called by the Respondents — where the witness was called by the Appellant but did not appear and a bench warrant was not issued — whether it was natural to expect the witness to have been called — where the witness was a family member with mental health issues and associated vulnerability
• 1. EVIDENCE — witness evidence — affidavits — use of direct speech to recount past conversations of which a witness recalls only the gist — where direct speech is prefaced with the phrase “words to the following effect”

Quick Take