A recent court ruling has overturned the last will of a 92-year-old legally blind woman, directing her multi-million dollar estate to six charities and a friend, as originally intended in an earlier will. The decision by the NSW Supreme Court invalidates a will signed just weeks before Wilma Pusterla's death in December 2023, which had left her entire fortune to her stepson, Philip Smith.
The estate, which includes a home valued at approximately $3.5 million as well as cash and investments, was the subject of a legal challenge by the Taronga Conservation Society Australia, WWF Australia, NextSense, MS Plus, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, and Guide Dogs NSW/ACT. These organizations had been beneficiaries of Ms. Pusterla's will for many years, with evidence showing consistent donations dating back to 1985.
The court heard that Mr. Smith brought two individuals, a friend and work colleague, to witness the signing of the disputed will on October 12, 2023. These witnesses were reportedly unfamiliar to Ms. Pusterla. The will was read aloud to her, and one witness later noted that Ms. Pusterla responded affirmatively when asked if she understood the document and inquired about where to sign.
Charities argued that Ms. Pusterla lacked testamentary capacity and was subject to undue influence by Mr. Smith. They presented evidence of her long-standing philanthropic commitments and her communication to these organizations about their inclusion in her will. Ms. Pusterla had also suffered from jaw cancer, significantly impacting her ability to eat solid food and leading her to reside in an aged-care facility prior to her death.
However, Justice Kate Williams ruled that Ms. Pusterla possessed the mental capacity to understand the nature and effect of making a will, despite her age and physical frailty. The judge found that the will could not be upheld due to suspicious circumstances and insufficient proof that Ms. Pusterla fully understood she was bequeathing her entire estate to Mr. Smith. The court noted that the solicitor who prepared the will never took instructions directly from Ms. Pusterla or discussed the draft with her prior to its signing, describing this handling as "highly questionable."
While the court heard Ms. Pusterla had expressed a desire for Mr. Smith to inherit her home, the October 2023 will provided him with her entire estate. Evidence suggested the solicitor, Frank Mathey, did not receive direct instructions from Ms. Pusterla regarding the distribution of her full estate.
Justice Williams also rejected claims that Mr. Smith exerted undue influence over Ms. Pusterla. The court accepted that Mr. Smith had maintained contact with her over many years, particularly after the death of his father, Ms. Pusterla's partner, in 2016. Mr. Smith had also taken on the role of Ms. Pusterla's attorney and enduring guardian in the months leading up to her death, managing her affairs and care.
The court's decision means the estate will be administered according to Ms. Pusterla's August 2020 will, reinstating the charitable bequests that had been part of her estate planning for over a decade. The matter of legal costs will be determined at a later date.