CASE: In the Estate of Edward Steven Middleton [2019] QSC 128

If you tear up your Will, does it cancel the Will or does it only cause a whole lotta headache for the administrator of your estate?

In this case, both.

There is a presumption that where the Will was last in the possession of the testator, and it cannot be located after their death, that the testator intentionally destroyed their Will intending to revoke it.

This is problematic where the Will has simply been misplaced or destroyed unintentionally.

But even if you do rip up you Will with dramatic flourish, wholly intending to cancel it, how can anyone know that for sure? It still needs to be proven which in itself is a hassle.

This case serves as a good example that even if your action has the intended outcome, there may have been an easier way to get there.

It also demonstrates that destroying your last Will does not automatically revive your earlier Will and may result in you having died with no Will at all.

CASE: Sadiq v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2015] NSWSC 716

When Christina Coombes died in June 2013, she left behind a decrepit home in Paddington, Sydney, and no Will.

After her death, Waleed Sadiq, a man 18 years her junior, claimed to have been in a romantic relationship with Christina for the past 17 years.

However, there was no record of Christina ever having a parter and her neighbours said that Waleed was just man who came by sometimes selling junk door-to-door.

Which was it? Was he her devoted spouse or a canny salesman who spotted an opportunity?

CASE: Priestley v Priestley [2017] NSWCA 155

In 2002, there was a rupture in the Priestley family that resulted in the father Gordon and his son on one side, facing off against the mother Beverley and two other children Christopher and Claire.

It resulted in not only the breakdown of Gordon's marriage, but also the family farming operation. When the matter was settled, after 2 years of litigation, all the parties walked away with a chunk of the farm properties.

For most of his life, Duncan had worked on his father's farm for little to no pay. After the dust had settled in 2004, Gordon was 80 years old and unable to take over the running of the farm. It was Duncan who provided care to his ageing father, financial support, and free labour to get the farm back on its feet.

So it was a huge surprise to Duncan to find out that Gordon had made a new Will in 2007 which left his estate equally to Duncan, his two other children, and his ex-wife Beverley.

CASE: Re Legal Practitioners Admissions Board and Sousa [2025] QSC 56

In 2023 Chanel Sousa had completed her law degree and was ready to become a lawyer. She applied to the Legal Practitioners Admissions Board to be admitted to the Roll of Legal Practitioners, to be able to practice law in Queensland.

Her application immediately hit a wall - Benjamin Millmann submitted an objection to Chanel’s admission.

The reasons behind his objection were odd to say the least and related to Millmann's past dealings with Chanel's domestic partner Senior Constable Seth Gilson.

Millmann had some unpleasant run-ins with law enforcement in the past and most recently with SC Gilson.

Millman turned the tables and HE investigated SC Gilson, in a manner which SC Gilson alleged was stalking.

This case was recommended by Case Nerd Molly Akhmatova <3

CASE: Rada v Smith [2024] NSWSC 273

“In the legal folklore which surrounded will making in Victorian England, the archetype of the spiteful father was one who disinherited his only child and left everything to the Battersea Dogs Home. That, almost literally, is what the plaintiff says her late father has done to her, albeit in Australia.” (Justice Kunc)

In this case the estranged daughter Rebecca moved with her mother to Canada when she was only 3 years old. Her father Igor stayed in Australia and they had limited contact throughout Rebecca's life.

When Igor died in 2022, he made no provision for his daughter in his Will.

Rebecca applied to the Court seeking provision from her late father's estate.

Many would describe Rebecca as Igor's long-estranged daughter and consider the estrangement as a relevant factor when determining whether Rebecca was entitle to any of her father's estate.

Justice Kunc warned that the use of the word "estranged" was problematic as it often associated with wrong-doing, condemnation, disgrace, or shameful behaviour.

CASE: Jamil v Medical Board of Australia [2024] SASC 90; Medical Board of Australia v Jamil [2023] SACAT 45.

In 2020 Dr Shamyal Hamoon Jamil was working as a registered medical intern at an Adelaide Hospital.

At the same hospital, university medical students would under work placements.

Jamil was charged with inappropriate sexual conduct in relation to two of the medical students, referred to in the judgment as AB and CD.

This case includes reviewing some of the messages exchanged, secret messages and deleted messages, nude photos, and faked messages.

Warning: sexually explicit, racist, and disturbing content.

CASE: Milewski v Holben [2014] NSWSC 388

Colin Robert Holben died when he was 50 years old. His last Will created an overly complex structure of testamentary trusts to hold his $11 million estate for his family.

His family consisted of his wife Lisa and their two teenage sons.

But Colin had been married before, to Adele Judith Milewski. They had divorced 16 years before Colin's death.

And Colin died, Adele made an application for provision from her ex-husband’s estate and, due to some unique circumstances, was successful.

CASE: Vosnakis v Arfaras [2015] NSWSC 625

Helen Vosnakis was buried in Eastern Suburbs Memorial Park – formerly known as Botany Cemetery - on 25 July 2012. She left behind her husband, Joseph Vosnakis, and her mother, Aristea Arfaras.

Not long after Helen’s burial, Joseph and Aristea would be entrenched in a sad legal dispute.

There was a burial licence for Helen’s grave that permitted two people to be buried in the grave. The legal dispute related to who owned the licence and who would eventually be buried with Helen.

Joseph wanted, on his death, to be buried with his late wife. Aristea claimed ownership of the burial licence and that she would be buried with Helen.