SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1946 Supreme(SC) 21

Harmes and another – Appellant
Versus
Hinkson – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Redden, Blake, Charles Russell and Co., Heber Nethery , L. Mackenna Robinson , R.M. Balfour , E. Holroyd Pearce

Lord du Paroq.-

On 4th April 1941, one George Harmes died at the Grey Nun's Hospital in the city of Regina. Two days later, Mr. Hinkson, the respondent to this appeal to His Majesty in Council, brought to the manager of the Canada Permanent Trust Company at its office in Regina a document which purported to be the will of George Harmes. It was dated 3rd April 1941, and named the Trust Company as executor. On 2nd May 1941, a petition was presented by the Trust Company, as executor to the Surrogate Court of the Judicial District of Regina praying that the will might be proved in solemn form. Its validity had been challenged by the next of kin, one of whom, Paul Harmes, is the first named appellant. The others, who lived in Greece, were represented in the ensuing proceedings by the second appellant, the Custodian of Enemy Property. In due course an order was made directing a trial to determine the validity of the will, and in particular the following issues: (a) the testamentary capacity of the deceased at the time of its execution, (b) its due execution, (c) the knowledge and volition of the testator as to its contents, (d) the allegation that the execution of the will was procured by































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top