Representation of the late Paul Glanville Hartopp: [2024] JRC 1180

In this case, the Royal Court of Jersey admitted a photocopy of a Will to probate for the Jersey estate of the late Paul Glanville Hartopp (the Deceased). The Deceased had executed two separate Wills—one for his assets in South Africa and another (referred to as the “non-South African Will”) for his assets in the United Kingdom, Guernsey, and Jersey. The original of the non-South African Will could not be found, prompting an application to admit a photocopy for probate in Jersey.

The non-South African Will was signed on 7^th June 2022, appointing Buckles LLP (English Solicitors) and Michael Pare as executors. However, Mr. Pare renounced his role as executor for the Jersey estate and Buckles subsequently instructed CLQ Probate and Attorney Services to pursue the Jersey probate application. Earlier, Buckles successfully applied to the High Court of England and Wales to admit a copy of the non-South African Will to probate, which was granted on 5^th June 2024.

The court was presented with evidence regarding the signing and witnessing of the non-South African Will. Two witnesses, Tanea Botha and Allen Spooner, confirmed their presence during the execution of the non-South African Will, and a third party, Duard Botha, who was present, provided an affidavit confirming a manuscript alteration made to include the name of the deceased’s wife, Adinda Hartopp, as a beneficiary. Both witnesses and the deceased had initialled this alteration, ensuring its validity.

Following the signing, the original non-South African Will was scanned and sent to Buckles, but after the Deceased’s death on 18^th June 2022, the original could not be located. Julie Cook, a solicitor from Buckles, attempted to recover the original from Adinda, who had stored it at their home. However, only a photocopy was available, and Adinda could not explain the original’s loss, though she believed she had posted it to Buckles.

The court considered whether the presumption of destruction with intent to revoke, established under the Estate of Greig [2006] JRC 058, applied in this case. This presumption arises when a will cannot be found. However, the court concluded that the presumption was rebutted by evidence demonstrating that the Deceased had not destroyed or revoked the non-South African Will. Given the short time between the non-South African Will’s execution and the deceased’s passing—only 11 days—the court found it unlikely that the non-South African Will had been revoked, especially as the Deceased was critically ill and sometimes comatose.

The court was satisfied that the Deceased intended the non-South African Will to govern his assets outside South Africa, and that it was validly executed under Jersey law. Both witnesses attested to the signing at the time of execution, fulfilling the requirements for a valid will in Jersey.

Based on the above findings, the Royal Court declared that the non-South African Will dated 7^th June 2022 was properly executed, but lost, and therefore ordered that the photocopy of the non-South African Will be admitted to probate in Jersey.