Michael Broadbent died in 2023, leaving unfinished: attempts to finalise a divorce from spouse Iris, with whom he had not been living for the last seven years, and; also leaving unfinished, a new will intended to leave all assets to his four children from an earlier marriage. Iris claimed in the High Court that his 2003 will signed two decades previously should stand, leaving her sole beneficiary of his estate.
His assets pass to his four children after Justice Wilkinson-Smith approved a later incomplete and unsigned will together with his lawyer’s file notes be admitted to probate as Mr Broadbent’s final testamentary statement.
With court approval, the Wills Act allows a combination of written documents, which do not comply with Wills Act formalities, to be treated as if they were a coherent will, provided they clearly record a deceased person’s testamentary wishes.
The High Court was told the major assets in Mr Broadbent’s estate are a half share in each of two residential properties in Auckland suburb Manurewa. The other half shares are owned by his estranged spouse Iris.
After separation from Iris, he lived at one of the Manurewa properties, she at the other. It was not an amicable separation.
No agreement was reached at that time over division of relationship property.
No further steps were taken over the next seven years to dissolve their marriage or to sort out relationship property issues until the final weeks of Mr Broadbent’s life, when his impending death from prostate cancer caused his children to prompt a need for some resolution.
His application to file for dissolution of his marriage was not finalised; he did not have an available copy of his marriage certificate.
A meeting with his lawyer to draft a new will stalled when he indicated that he would instead use an online template and prepare his own will, preferring a do-it-yourself option to save legal costs.
It was file notes taken by his lawyer at this meeting which were later to form part of the court-constructed will evidencing a wish to leave all assets to his children.
Evidence was given that Iris was not told of Mr Broadbent’s death until after the funeral.
Three months after his death, those of Mr Broadbent’s children living at the Manurewa property where he lived prior to his death were told to pay rent, or leave.
At this point, the property was half-owned by Mr Broadbent’s estranged spouse Iris and half-owned by his estate, with the beneficiaries of his estate unclear.
The effect of Justice Wilkinson-Smith’s ruling is that now both Manurewa properties are half owned by Mr Broadbent’s children and half owned by Iris.
Sensing there is going to be ongoing difficulties between these co-owners, she recommended agreement be reached over division of the assets, rather than incurring legal costs of returning to court.
Earlier, evidence had been given of unresolved discussions prior to Mr Broadbent’s death to have he and Iris buy out the other’s ownership interest in each of the houses they lived in, with a cash adjustment to reflect the differing property values.
Broadbent v. Broadbent-Matete – High Court (4.12.24)
25.044