A HIGH Court judge was yesterday urged by counsel for the estranged wife of deceased property developer Brian Rhatigan to be “highly suspicious” of his will.
Michael Counihan SC, for Odilla Rhatigan, made the comment in submissions on the last day of proceedings over the will of Rhatigan (60), who died in February 2006 after complications from motor neurone disease and a condition related to Parkinson’s disease.
The late developer’s solicitor and executor, Sharon Scally, wants the court to declare the 23-page document signed by Mr Rhatigan as his last will and testament. Ms Rhatigan disputes that and alleges he was not of sound mind when making the will due to his medical condition.
The will was made in May 2005 following meetings attended by Ms Scally; a business associate of the deceased, Patrick O’Sullivan; a barrister and trust expert, Charles Haccius, and Rhatigan himself.
Ms Scally told the court that while the disease had robbed Rhatigan of the power of speech, he communicated through hand signals and with a computer device called a Dynawrite. At the time of his death Rhatigan was living in “Chantilly”, Rathmichael, Dublin, with his new partner, Rachel Kiely, and their two children, having separated several years earlier from Ms Rhatigan, with whom he had three children.
Ms Justice Mary Laffoy asked Mr Counihan of what she was being asked to be suspicious.
Mr Counihan said the court should be suspicious because the drawing up of the will was not in accordance with best practice, including the absence of a direct record of Rhatigan’s instructions and the fact there was no contemporaneous medical report of his testamentary capacity when the will was made.
The judge asked if he was suggesting Ms Scally, Mr O’Sullivan and Mr Haccius got together to get Rhatigan to sign a will of whose contents he was unaware. Why, she asked, would they have done such a thing?
Mr Counihan said he did not know and the court could not either, but in the absence of such answers, the court could not decide in favour of the will on the balance of probabilities.
Ms Justice Laffoy said she was, at this stage, only deciding whether the will should be admitted as his last will and testament and hoped to give her decision within the next three weeks.
In submissions for Ms Scally, James Dwyer SC, said the only person unhappy with the will was Ms Rhatigan. Everybody involved had been included in the will.
Ms Rhatigan, of Cabinteely, Dublin, has brought a counter-claim to the proceedings alleging that, when their marriage broke down, Rhatigan had promised her she would benefit from half of his estate on the basis she would not pursue a legal separation.
She claims he put significant assets into trusts for the purpose of defeating her legal right to her share of the estate. She also claims Ms Scally was not an appropriate person to act as an executor. Ms Scally denies the claims.