The Victorian Supreme Court decision in Nicholson v Knaggs stands as a watershed moment in Australian estate planning law – not just for its dramatic elements involving a $15 million estate, an elderly testator, and burnt diaries, but for the crucial lessons it teaches about protecting vulnerable clients and ensuring their true wishes are properly recorded.

At Hill Legal, we’ve studied this landmark case extensively, and it serves as a powerful reminder of our responsibilities as legal practitioners in safeguarding our clients’ interests. The case centered on 84-year-old Betty Dyke, whose substantial estate became the subject of heated litigation after she made wills that dramatically benefited her neighbours, despite her previously expressed animosity toward one of them.

The court ultimately invalidated two wills – finding Betty lacked testamentary capacity for the final will and was subjected to undue influence in the penultimate version. This outcome highlights three critical warning signs that every estate planning practitioner must recognise and act upon.

Warning Sign One: Recognising Modern Undue Influence

Traditionally, proving undue influence in testamentary matters required almost impossible evidence of overt coercion or threats. Nicholson v Knaggs revolutionised this area by establishing that undue influence can operate through subtle pressure, manipulation, or exploitation of vulnerability, and courts can draw inferences from circumstantial evidence.

In Betty’s case, the court found Denise Knaggs had unduly influenced her to include Tim Knaggs as a major beneficiary, despite Betty’s well-documented dislike of him. The evidence was entirely circumstantial – Betty’s longstanding hostility toward Tim, his minimal involvement in her care, and the suspicious manner in which his name was added to the will through a phone call from his wife to the solicitor.

At Hill Legal, we’ve adapted our practice to recognise these subtler forms of influence. We’re particularly alert when a will includes beneficiaries the client has previously expressed negative feelings about, especially when another party is controlling or heavily involved in the will-making process.

Warning Sign Two: The Solicitor as Guardian

The conduct of the legal practitioners in Nicholson v Knaggs provides sobering lessons about our professional duties. One solicitor became suspicious enough to warn Tim Knaggs to “back off and let her make up her own mind,” yet still proceeded with the problematic provisions. The solicitor who drafted the ultimately invalid will maintained inadequate records, failed to inquire about Betty’s dramatic changes from previous wills, and didn’t obtain a medical assessment despite her age and apparent frailty.

Australian law has long recognised that solicitors owe their clients an unfettered service of their interests, with heightened duties when taking instructions from obviously enfeebled testators where capacity is potentially in doubt. Where lawyers have doubts about capacity, they should obtain professional medical assessments from practitioners experienced in cognitive assessment, with carefully drafted referral letters setting out the relevant legal standards.

Hill Legal has developed comprehensive protocols for these situations. When dealing with elderly or vulnerable clients, we insist on taking instructions directly from the client without beneficiaries present, maintain detailed contemporaneous file notes explaining the client’s reasoning for any significant changes, ask probing questions to test understanding of assets and beneficiaries, and actively recommend formal capacity assessments when any doubt exists.

Warning Sign Three: The Devastating Impact of Destroyed Evidence

Perhaps the most memorable aspect of Nicholson v Knaggs was Denise Knaggs’ admission that she had burned her diaries covering the exact period when the contested wills were made. The court applied the principle omnia praesumuntur contra spoliatorem – all things are presumed against a wrongdoer who destroys evidence – and drew adverse inferences that fatally undermined her credibility.

This demonstrates the critical importance of maintaining comprehensive contemporaneous records. At Hill Legal, we ensure all client interactions are thoroughly documented, including the client’s mental state, their reasons for any changes, and the processes we follow to verify their capacity and wishes.

Contemporary Relevance and Legal Development

Recent academic research has highlighted that 21st century concerns about testamentary capacity assessment are being questioned by both legal and medical professions, with calls for legal actors to expand their knowledge of mentally disabling conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease. With increasing wealth in society and rising dementia prevalence, significantly more people with cognitive disabilities are making or changing wills near the end of their lives.

The complexity of testamentary capacity assessment is growing, with suggestions that proper assessment may constitute not just a legal requirement but a definite duty, while practitioners must prepare wills according to client instructions and leave validity determinations to courts.

Hill Legal’s Hot Take

Nicholson v Knaggs isn’t just a cautionary tale – it’s a roadmap for excellence in estate planning practice. The case demonstrates that protecting vulnerable clients requires vigilance beyond formal legal requirements. It demands emotional intelligence to recognise subtle influence, professional courage to ask difficult questions, and meticulous attention to documentation.

At Hill Legal, we’ve integrated these lessons into every aspect of our estate planning practice. We don’t just draft documents; we serve as guardians of our clients’ true intentions, ensuring their final wishes reflect their genuine desires rather than external pressures.

The $15 million question isn’t just about money – it’s about dignity, autonomy, and ensuring that every client’s legacy reflects their authentic choices. The burnt diaries remind us that our contemporaneous records may be the only evidence standing between a valid will and a legal disaster.

Ready to protect your estate planning interests? Contact Hill Legal today for comprehensive estate planning advice that puts your wishes first. Our experienced team understands the complexities of modern estate law and will ensure your assets are distributed according to your true intentions. Don’t let your legacy become the subject of costly litigation – call Hill Legal today on 03 5976 6500 or send us a message at www.hilllegal.com.au for expert guidance on all your estate planning needs.