Edwards v Hinds
| Jurisdiction | Barbados |
| Judge | Belgrave, J. |
| Judgment Date | 23 February 1996 |
| Neutral Citation | BB 1996 HC 3 |
| Docket Number | No. 825 of 1992 |
| Court | High Court (Barbados) |
| Date | 23 February 1996 |
High Court
Belgrave, J.
No. 825 of 1992
Mr. Leslie Haynes for plaintiff
Mr. William Chandler with Mr. Derek Daniel for the defendant.
Inheritance and succession - Will — Admission to probate — Whether the deceased was of sound mind when he affixed his signature to the will — Whether the defendant as the deceased's lawful niece was entitled to a share of the estate — Finding that on the evidence the deceased was not in a sound state of mind when he affixed his signature to the will which the plaintiff was seeking to propound — Plaintiff's claim was dismissed
In this action the plaintiff Vita Orneathea Edwards of Weston, St. James is seeking an order of the court to admit to probate in solemn form, a Will dated the 21st day of November, 1989, which she contends was made on that date by the late Elridge Leroy Cumberbatch at a time when he was of sound mind and capable of executing the said Will in which she is named as executrix and sole beneficiary of the entire estate of the deceased the said Elridge Leroy Cumberbatch who died in this island on the 19th day of July, 1990.
The defendant Everil Aleitha Hinds also of Weston, St. James opposes the plaintiff's application having timeously entered a caveat to the plaintiff's application for a grant of probate of the Will as aforesaid.
The plaintiff being anxious to get the dispute resolved filed a Writ of Summons in the High Court seeking probate of the said Will.
The defendant's defence as pleaded is that the deceased Elridge Leroy Cumberbatch was not of sound mind, memory and understanding on 21st November, 1989 at the time when he is alleged to have made the said will.
The particulars of the deceased unsoundness of mind, memory and understanding are stated as follows.
At the time the deceased executed the alleged will was of the age of 77 years and suffering from senile dementia. His memory was so defective and untrustworthy that there was an almost total loss of memory of recent events and in particular he had forgotten and was frequently unable to recognise many of his closest relations and friends. He was at the time of the execution of the alleged Will in such a condition of mind and memory as to be unable understand the nature of the act and its effects or the extent of the property of which he was disposing or to comprehend and appreciate the claims to which he ought to give effect.
The defendant further pleaded in paragraph 2 further or in the alternative that:–
At the time of the execution of the said will dated 21st day of November, 1989, the deceased did not know or approve of the contents thereof.
By way of counterclaim the defendant says that she is the lawful niece and person entitled to share in the estate of Elridge Leroy Cumberbatch late of Weston, St. James, who died on 19th day of July, 1990 and she counterclaims for an order of the court which would pronounce against the alleged will dated 21st day of November, 1989 and an order making a grant to her of Letters of Administration of the Estate and effects of the deceased.
In reply to the defendant's defence and counterclaim the plaintiff denied each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the defence and joined issue thereon and as far as the counterclaim is concerned the plaintiff maintains that she is the executrix appointed under the will of the deceased Elridge Leroy Cumberbatch dated 21st November, 1989 and that she is entitled to a grant of probate of the said will in solemn form.
The plaintiff gave evidence on her own behalf and produced certain documents. Her case is that she is a single woman 48 years of age and is the mother of 4 children. She knew the deceased Elridge Leroy Cumberbatch from the time she was a young girl about 8–10 years old. He was a single man who worked as a school teacher. He used to visit her mother's home regularly. She called him uncle. She developed a good relationship with the deceased in his lifetime. The plaintiff said that she used to wash and press the deceased's clothes. That he called her in 1986 and told her that he was sick and wanted to see her. She went to see him early one morning. He told her he was ill and hungry. She gave him ovaltine and biscuits. He was living alone at the time. He invited her to come and live in the house with him so that she could look after him. She gave up her job and went to look after him. She remained at his house and looked after him from 1986 until 1987. He received a pension of about $500.00 per month which she used to run the house. That she had a daughter named Kathy 18 years old who lived with her there. The plaintiff said that she knew the defendant Everil Hinds who is her first cousin. That she and the defendant did not get on well, the defendant was abusive towards her and after she could not put up with that type of behaviour; she left the home of the deceased and returned to her own home at Ashton Hall, St. Peter. The deceased became dissatisfied when she left and kept asking her to come back to his home and continue to look after him. She returned to him in September 1988 and remained there with him until he died in 1990. The plaintiff said that she know that the defendant had employed a maid to look after the deceased after she had returned to his home. The plaintiff said that she knew that the deceased (uncle Elridge) was forgetful and although he had retired he would leave home and go down by St. Albans School where he had been employed as head master. On getting to the school he would go in the school and say prayers with the children. He would leave home on mornings after the bell at that school was rung. The plaintiff said that the deceased had told her that he did not know what he would have done without her that she was a great help to him. That he was going to make a will. He consulted Dr. Waldo Ramsay by telephone. He wrote down what he was told by Dr. Ramsay. He gave her the notes which he had taken which consisted of instructions as to the making of a will. She said that he told her that he was going to write the will himself based on the instructions he had received from Dr. Ramsay.
The next day the deceased gave her a will which he had written himself. He told her to get it typed and bring it back to him. She did so. He told her to take him to Dr. Ramsay and she took him to Dr. Ramsay's office at Swan Street, Bridgetown by taxi. The deceased spoke to Dr. Ramsay. She did not hear what he told Dr. Ramsay as she did not go into the office with him. She remained in the reception area. The deceased remained with Dr. Ramsay for about half an hour. The plaintiff identified the will which the deceased had signed in the presence of Dr. Ramsay. Dr. Ramsay had signed the will as a witness.
The plaintiff said further that the will was typed by her sister and it was taken by the deceased to Dr. Ramsay's office a couple of days after it had been typed. She agreed that the date 21st November, 1989 is typed and not written and that is the date on which it was actually typed by her sister. It was signed about 4 days after it was so typed she said.
The plaintiff said that she heard Dr. Gibling say that the deceased was suffering from senile dementia when he saw him between 4th January, 1988. She said that she was not present when Dr. Ramsay and the deceased were speaking. In answer to Mr. Elliott Mottles Q.C. for the defendant, the plaintiff said that the deceased was the owner of a dwellinghouse at Porters, St. James which was valued at $196,000.00 and that the deceased had conveyed that property to her by deed of gift on 8th January, 1988. The plaintiff identified a copy of the said deed of gift which shows that it was prepared by Dr. Ramsay and executed by the deceased and herself. The plaintiff maintained that she was related to the deceased. Her mother was Enid Bovell who was the sister of the deceased. She said that the house at Weston, St. James is valued at over $80,000.00 and that there is a parcel of land at Mount Standfast, St. James which is about a quarter of an acre and is valued at $12,000.00. The furniture in the said house is valued at $15,000.
The witness George Scantlebury gave evidence on behalf of the plaintiff. He said that he is 76 years old. The deceased Elridge Leroy Cumberbatch was his half brother. He was 15 years old when he knew the deceased. He knew that the deceased died in 1990. He did not go to the funeral as he was ill. Elridge used to visit his home regularly and Elridge knew all of his friends. This witness said that he was not aware that Elridge had made a will in which he had left his estate to the plaintiff. Elridge had told him in his lifetime that he intended leaving his estate to someone who was looking after him. Mr. Scantlebury said that he knew that Elridge's sister used to look after him until she took ill. That after the sister took ill a niece used to look after the deceased. Scantlebury said that he knew the defendant Everil Hinds. But he did not know that she looked after the deceased when her mother was ill and was unable to do so. Scantlebury said that when Elridge was ill he said that he did not want to see the defendant. The witness Scantlebury said that it would not have suprised him if the deceased had left his estate to the niece who had looked after him. In answer to Mr. Elliott Mottley Q.C. the witness Scantlebury said that he knew that the deceased had one niece who looked after him when he was ill. He visited the deceased when he had an operation to his hip. He did not visit the deceased when he was in hospital. The last time he saw the deceased he was at his home at Weston, St. James. The plaintiff's daughter was with the deceased. But he could not recall the date or the year when he last saw the deceased. He believed however that it was sometime in 1985. He...
To continue reading
Request your trial