Seventh-day Adventist Church stood back from claiming three-quarters of a Samoan widow’s estate who died without leaving a will but had signed a preliminary ‘personal profile document’ prepared by Church staff leaving the bulk of her assets to the Church.
Pepe Matthes lived in Mangere, Auckland. She died in 2017. Conflict arose on the one side between two of her children who applied to the High Court for letters of administration to handle her estate and on the other her brother Tipi who asked that a Seventh-day Adventist ‘profile document’ signed by his sister some eighteenth months prior to her death be validated as her intended will. Tipi is a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Justice Davidson was to rule the ‘profile document’ could not stand as her will and that Auckland lawyer Mr Peter Oliver be appointed to administer Pepe Matthes estate.
The Church gave evidence that it assisted adherents in drafting wills. Staff had adherents sign a ‘profile document’ setting out their wishes as an interim measure. A formal will was then prepared and posted out for signature. The ‘profile document’ signed by Ms Matthes in July 2015 expressed her intention to bequeath three-quarters of her assets to various branches of the Church and the remaining quarter for the education of her nieces and nephews. The document stated she made no provision for her children as they had been adopted by her and had now returned to their natural families. This statement was later challenged in the High Court. Evidence was given that three of the children were adopted from Samoa in 1994 for the express purpose of bringing them to New Zealand. A fourth was adopted as an informal whangai adoption.
The court was told that Ms Matthes did not respond to multiple Church letters requesting she return a signed copy of her draft will confirming her bequests. The Church said it would not press for validation of the ‘personal profile document’ as being her final wishes. Justice Davidson refused Tipi’s application for validation. Ms Matthes inertia in responding to the Church’s requests for final signature raised a very real doubt as to whether the Church document signed earlier remained her testamentary intent, he said.
Justice Davidson highlighted that Mr Oliver, now appointed as the independent administrator of Ms Matthes estate, has number of complicated issues to resolve. Eviction proceedings are underway to remove from Ms Matthes’ home two people who were living with her at the time of her death. And there is the question of $300,000 cash withdrawn from her bank account two weeks before she died. Evidence points to this money being invested in a cryptocurrency called Onecoin.
Re Estate of Matthes – High Court (28.09.18)
18.193