Make or Contest a Will.
no-nonsense Wills and Estates lawyers in Brunswick and preston
Wills & Estates Lawyers
We are no-nonsense Wills & Estates lawyers who talk straight with our clients, charge fairly and have the experience to provide sound advice.
Our legal services are high quality, our advice is clear, and we are transparent with costs. Our clients have direct access to their lawyer, not just their assistant.
We are a reliable established firm in the Northern suburbs offering a practical and direct approach to the practice of law. Each of our lawyers works exclusively in one practice area and comes to our firm with substantial experience.
Our clients can expect to:
- Receive good advice and firm representation from an experienced estates lawyer.
- Have access to our professional network of experts and legal minds.
- Feel comfortable and supported in our collaborative and judgment-free legal practice environment.
With offices in Brunswick and Preston, we advise and represent clients in estate disputes, contested wills, probate applications, estate planning, preparation of wills & powers of attorney, guardianship applications, and estate administration.
Our substantial experience in challenging and contesting Wills means makes us well placed to prepare incontestable Wills for our clients. For instance, in 2021 we sucessfully challenged a Will at a trial in the Supreme Court (the Court overturned the deceased’s Will – read the case here).
Jason Falzon, senior Wills and Estates Lawyer, heads our Estates Department. With over 10 years’ Estates Law experience, he gives good advice, talks straights with his clients and is firm with his adversaries. He charges his clients fairly and is honest about their case prospects, strategies and costs.
We have a proven record of contesting wills on behalf of beneficiaries treated unfairly and those excluded altogether. Similarly, a Will we have made has never been successfully contested.
Jason regularly assists testators to prepare wills and estate plans. He also represents executors to obtain grants of probate and to defend estates from unmeritorious claims.
An incontestable Power of Attorney
A power of attorney (‘POA’) is a legally binding document signed by a person (‘the Principal’) giving another person (‘the Attorney’) control over the Principal’s financial, personal, and legal affairs. Importantly, a Principal can only sign a POA while they have decision making capacity.
Unfortunately POAs are often invalid for technical reasons. Banks and other institutions will not accept an invalid POA. If the Principal loses decision making capacity before the Attorney discovers the invalidity, it is too late to make a new POA.
An Attorney with an invalid POA will need to apply to VCAT for a determination about who controls the Principal’s affairs. If more than one person wants control, the dispute becomes costly and protracted.
We recently successfully defended a contested Power of Attorney in VCAT (read the case here)
VCAT usually holds multiple hearings and appoints the Office of the Public Advocate to investigate. The parties and their lawyers often also obtain medical reports, subpoena witnesses, and make written submissions for VCAT’s consideration.
Many of these disputes could have been avoided if the POA had been properly prepared.
An incontestable Will
Preparing a Will is one of the most important documents you can prepare during your lifetime. Without a Will your estate will be distributed in accordance with legislation, and you will likely leave behind a great deal of stress for your loved ones at an otherwise difficult time whilst they cope with your passing.
A will is a document prepared by the will maker (‘the testator’) directing an executor how to distribute the testator’s estate after their death. The terms of a will are often successfully contested, usually by one or more family members of the deceased testator. Reasons for contesting a will include:
- Unequal distribution of assets between (or the exclusion of) children as beneficiaries in a will.
- Uncertainty about the validity of a will for technical reasons.
- A will prepared by a person after they have shown signs of dementia.
- A will prepared by a person in their final few days of life.
- Poor choice of executor(s) in a will.
- Poor choice of the distribution of specific assets in a will.
- Use of onerous conditions on the vesting of gifts to beneficiaries in a will.
- You can mitigate the risk of a claim against your will or estate by thinking your will through, obtaining advice, and planning the disposition of your assets.
Most wills and estate disputes resolve by negotiation prior to Court proceedings. Disputes that proceed to Court are costly to the estate, which usually pays the parties’ legal costs.
The cost, length and outcome of a dispute will often reflect the skill, experience, and attitude of the lawyers involved. Jason Falzon is an experienced negotiator who will talk straight with you. He is also in regular communication with some of the most competent barristers in the field.
We have successfully both contested and defended numerous Wills (read our successfull 2021 Supreme Court case judgment here).
Case highlights
“In the absence of clear and satisfactory proof, the court cannot be satisfied that the deceased knew and approved of the contents of the Will.” – Judge McMillan, 17 May 2021
2023
- Supreme Court: RESTRICTED JUDGMENT – successfully conducted a strike out application in a commercial case involving allegations of breach of restraint of trade and infringement of intellectual property rights.
- Supreme Court: Pryda Developments Pty Ltd -v- Noble Lawyers Pty Ltd (S ECI 2023 03433) – successfully defended a winding up application.
- County Court: Man -v- Fragrance Vic-Mel (Spencer) Pty Ltd (CI 22 05117) – successfully defended a strike out application.
- Supreme Court: Gigliotti -v- Gigliotti (S ECI 2023 00575) – Obtained a substantial costs order in the Supreme Court costs court.
- VCAT, Guardianship List: FXX (Guardianship) [2023] VCAT 382 (14 April 2023) – Obtained a compensation order against a person who abused their authority under a Power of Attorney in contravention of section 63 of the Power of Attorney Act 2014.
- Supreme Court: D’Auria -v- D’Auria [2023] VSC 533 – Conducted a 6-day trial in the Supreme Court.
- County Court: Man -v- Fragrance Vic-Mel (Spencer) Pty Ltd (CI 22 05117) – successfully defended an application for security for costs.
2022
- Supreme Court: Successfully appealed an incorrect Magistrates’ Court judgment regarding alleged breaches of the Civil Procedure Act.
- Supreme Court: RESTRICTED JUDGMENT – successfully defended an asset ‘freezing order’ application and obtained an order for legal costs.
- Supreme Court: RESTRICTED JUDGMENT – obtained a Court order to remove a person illegally occupying a Melbourne house and obtained order for legal costs.
- VCAT: VNH (Guardianship) [2022] VCAT 379 – overturned a 2021 Power of Attorney and upheld a 2017 Power of Attorney.
2021
- Supreme Court: Re Jones [2021] VSC 273 – obtained a Court Order at trial overturning a deceased’s Will, resulting in a greater share of the estate for our client.
- County Court: Le & Austviet International Pty Ltd -v- SL (CI-19-06064) – brought an application to dismiss a Court proceeding for abuse of process.
2020
- Supreme Court: Dessco Pty Ltd v Davey; Elvin v Davey [2020] VSC 696 – successfully defended a summary judgment application.
- Supreme Court: Vorontsov & Anor v Fong & Ors (No 2) [2020] VSC 458 – obtained a Court Order dismissing the case against our client.
2019
- County Court: Layer 7 Group Pty Ltd -v- Snooze Management Pty Ltd (CI 18 04893) – successfully defended an application for security for costs.
- VCAT: OYN (Guardianship) [2019] VCAT 474 – obtained a VCAT Order revoking an Administration Order.
- Magistrates’ Court: Muhammad -v- Sampieri (J12533895) – successfully defended a summary judgment application.
2018
- County Court: Secgin v Mohamad & Ors (CI 18 011467) – defended a claim arising from a drafting error on a sale of land contract.
- VCAT: Lefkas Builders Pty Ltd v Hargale Investments Pty Ltd [2018] VCAT 935 – obtained a judgment ordering the return of tools and machinery to our client.
2017
- Supreme Court: Van de Velde -v- Levinzon & Registrar of Titles [S CI 2015 2970] VSC 532 – defended a costs application.
- Magistrates’ Court: Samatar -v- Warsame (H10227948) – conducted a 4-day trial as plaintiff and defended an application to stay the case.
- Supreme Court: Lefkas Builders Pty Ltd & Anor v JBT Lawyers & Anor (S CI 2017 02615) – sued a solicitor for breach of solicitor’s undertaking.
2016
- Magistrates’ Court: Davey -v- Dessmann (G11441224) – successfully defended against a strike out application.