EDITORIAL:
The family notice for the death and funeral arrangements for Tim Posa was simple enough.
"Posa, Tihomir (Tim). Passed away peacefully at Waitakere Hospital on Tuesday 2nd October 2018 aged 86. Dearly loved partner to Lale (Ava), brother to Ivan, Miro and the late Frana."
But, as is so often the case with families, the Herald notice belied the complicated legacy Posa's death left behind.
It has taken a judgment from the High Court at Auckland to finally put the matter to rest, dividing his Auckland home between Lale Nelson, who shared almost 50 years of his life, and Ortencia Tenchavez, who turned up from the Philippines a few years before his death.
Lawyers working in the specialist field say the courts are seeing an increase in contested wills. One reason is there is more at stake given the compounding increases in property values over recent decades.
Another reason, as solicitor Carolyn Ranson points out, is the Boomer population bulge reaching life expectancy.
For once, Posa's case wasn't an example of a person dying without a will. However, his last will was so recently written after 50 years of a relationship, which continued in a manifestly obvious nature up until his death, meant it was open to challenge.
Advertisement
Advertise with NZME.The split of 65 per cent of his estate to his longtime partner and 35 per cent to the more recent companion would seem a fair outcome.
This does appear to be contrary to the wishes of the departed jazz musician Tim Posa but, by most accounts, he doesn't sound to have had much truck with fairness.
The law recognises a moral duty lives on after a death. Of course, people are entitled to express their wishes as to how matters are settled after they die. But, if those wishes are manifestly unfair, and likely to be recognised as such by a court, such a will has all the more potential to line the pockets of lawyers under challenge.
Being dead is no excuse for being difficult and - if asked to look into it - the courts are likely to call you on it.
