FINCK & ANOTHER V. GRAMP & OTHERS

FOZ OQ oe

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

¥/s a

eon RENCK. AND. ANO TARR

we GRAMP_AND OTHERS

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Judgment delivered at. MELBOURNE exon Bo one on nines © Otho KRIDAY, 13th, JUNBs 1952.

FINCK & ANOR.

ve GRANP & ORS.

ORDER

Appesl dismissed with costs.

JUDGMENT

GRANP

& _ANOR. ve rl & ORS. é )

ma

> i

a

FINCK & ANOR. ve

GRAMP_ & ORS.

DIXON C.d.

WILLIAMS J. JUDGMENT KiTTO J.

This is an sppeal from the Full Supreme Court of South Australia which, by a majority, dismissed an appeal from a judgment of Paine A.J, refusing probate of a document purporting to be the last will and testament of Hugo Edwin Gramp who died on llth August 1950. The question at issue on the eppeal is essentially one of fact. It is whether the document was duly executed and attested as required by sec. 8 of the Wills Act 1936(S.A.). The document is dated 7th July 1950 and bears the signatures of the deceased end of two other persons, M. O, Riedel end Margaret W. Jeffree. The signature of the deceased is at the foot of the will end the signatures of Riedel end Jeffree are below an attestation clause in the following words "signed by the testator as and for his last will and testament in the presence of us both present at the same time who in his presence and in the presence of each other have here- unto subscribed our names as witnesses". Accordingly the document on its face satisfies the requirements of the section. There is a strong presumption that a document so signed and attested, particularly where there is a proper attestation clause, is a duly executed will and the burden of proving clearly that it is not in fact a valid will lies on its opponents,

In the present case the evidence of Riedel would, if accepted, prove that the document was signed by Gramp in his presence and that of Sister Jeffree and that they then signed in the presence of Gramp and of each other as stated