XBO v XBP [2024] SGHCF 36

Outcome: Orders Made.

Facts

1            The parties are the testator’s children. In 2011, the testator made a will bequeathing the Property to the defendant (“the 2011 Will”). In 2012, the testator made another will (“the 2012 Will”) giving the Property to the plaintiff. After the demise of the testator in 2019, the defendant remained in exclusive occupation of the Property. The defendant is challenging the validity of the 2012 Will on the ground that the testator lacked the testamentary capacity to execute it.

Court’s Decision:

2           The testator had testamentary capacity when he made the 2012 Will. Consequently, the 2012 Will – not the 2011 Will – is the testator’s last true will and valid in law.: at [2] and [43].

3            It is trite that for a will to be valid, the testator must (a) have the mental capacity to make a will; (b) have knowledge and approval of the contents of the will; and (c) be free from undue influence or the effects of fraud.: at [20].

4            Even if the testator suffers from a serious mental illness, such as dementia, at the material time of executing the will, the court is not precluded from finding that the testator had testamentary capacity.: at [23].

5            The propounder of the will bears the legal burden of proving that the testator possessed testamentary capacity. Often, this is prima facie established by proof of the due execution of the will in ordinary circumstances where the testator was not known to be suffering from any kind of mental disability.: at [24].

6          M/s [F] and [G] are independent witnesses, neither of whom have a stake in the outcome of the proceedings. Their testimonies materially corroborate each other. They confirmed that the testator looked very healthy and that nothing in his words or conduct at the time indicated that he lacked the testamentary capacity to make the 2012 Will.: at [42].

7            In assessing the validity of a will, it is necessary to ascertain the mental state of the testator at the time of the execution of the will. The events before and after the execution of the will may shed some light as to the testamentary capacity of the testator at that time.: at [45].

8            The independence of the testator, particularly his financial independence, around the material time of the execution of the 2012 Will, does suggest that the testator was of sound mind.: at [44] to [49].

The full text of the decision can be found here.

This summary is provided to assist the public to have a better understanding of the Court’s judgment. It is not intended to be a substitute for the reasons of the Court. All numbers in bold font and square brackets refer to the corresponding paragraph numbers in the Court’s judgment.