Nock v Austin [1918] HCA 73

OF AUSTRALIA. 519

{HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.}

RM a APPELLANT; DEFENDANT, :

AND

USTIN AND ANOTHER 4 3 ; . ReEsPonDENTS. PLAINTIFFS,

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES.

l—Validity—Knowledge and approval of contents—Bvidence—Benefits received 1, ©. or A.

by persons preparing will—Suit for probate—Costs of unsuccessful opposition. 918, In a suit to obtain probate of a will which was prepared by the plaintiffs, ¢ oy

one of whom was a solicitor, and under which both plaintiffs received large 45 1g

benefits, i: oe Held, that, the trial Judge having directed his mind to the question whether, — 555,

in view of the suspicious circumstances, the plaintiffs had established that the _ Isaacs and

testator knew and approved of the contents of the will of which they claimed *"*" >™*Y 77:

a grant of probate, and having found that they had established that fact,

and there being evidence to support that finding, his decision in favour of

the plaintiffs should not be disturbed.

Held, also, that as the circumstances led reasonably to an investigation and as the fact that those cireumstances aroused suspicion was largely due to the conduct of the plaintiffs in not seeing that the testator had independent advice, the defendant should have the costs of her unsuccessful opposition out of the residue in which the plaintiffs alone were interested.

Per Isaacs J.: Propositions of law stated relevant to the proof of a tes- tator's knowledge and approval of the contents of his will.

Decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Harvey J.) varied and affirmed. a

520 HIGH COURT (191s.

H.C. or A. Apprat from the Supreme Court of New South Wales. pee A suit was brought in the Supreme Court in its probate jurisdiction Nock — by Arthur John Samuel Austin and Alfred Joseph Morgan claiming a

Avusr. grant of probate to them of the will of Edward Nock, deceased, made