A HIGH Court judge has ruled a property developer was of sound mind and knew exactly what he was doing when he made a will disputed by his estranged wife.
Brian Rhatigan had separated from his wife Odilla in the early 1990s, with whom he had three children, and was living with his partner, Rachael Kiely, with whom he had two children, at the time of his death.
Ms Justice Mary Laffoy said it was reasonable to infer that the assets presented by the late Brian Rhatigan during the drafting of his will were only part of his assets.
The dispute arose after the death of Mr Rhatigan (60), of “Chantilly”, Ballybride Road, Rathmichael, Dublin, in February 2006.
Odilla Rhatigan later claimed her estranged husband was not capable of making a 23-page will eight months before his death on grounds he had motor neurone disease which robbed him of his speech.
Ms Rhatigan, “Briodi”, Brennanstown Road, Cabinteely, Dublin, claimed she was entitled to half his will and alleged Mr Rhatigan had set up a trust to defeat or diminish her right to her share of the estate.
The court was told that, on May 19th, 2005, Mr Rhatigan signed a will in which he made his solicitor Sharon Scally, of Amorys Solicitors, Sandyford, a co-executor. Another executor has since died.
A legal warning, or “caveat”, was entered to the will on behalf of Odilla Rhatigan in November 2008. Ms Scally then brought proceedings seeking an order from the High Court that the will be admitted as his last will and testament.
In her judgment yesterday, the judge said the evidence presented to her during the hearing showed Mr Rhatigan’s business affairs were a “tangled web” of offshore trusts, property developments, corporations and investments.
Despite his “severe disability” and cognitive limitations, Mr Rhatigan knew exactly what he was doing when he made the will and did have the required testamentary capacity, the judge ruled.
She determined Mr Rhatigan both knew and approved of the will’s contents and was of “sound disposing mind”.
Although his widow had claimed in 2008 he had a net Irish estate of about €6.3 million, that figure had not factored in his indebtedness to the Revenue Commissioners, the judge said.
As a consequence, the net value of the estate was unknown, she said.
However, she said, it was patently clear from the evidence “much more was going on behind the scenes” in relation to Mr Rhatigan’s assets than was reflected in the will.
This included what would happen to Mr Rhatigan’s home, “Chantilly”, eventually sold after his death for €3.3 million, she said.
Ms Scally told the court the proceeds were paid to a company called Unit 33 Nominees Ltd which was part of a Cyprus-registered Golden Promise Trust.
Although it was not clear from the evidence of Mr Rhatigan’s partner, Ms Kiely, the judge said the distinct impression the court had from Ms Kiely’s cross-examination was that she was the beneficiary of the sale of the house.
It was difficult to accept Mr Rhatigan was not the instigator of what was happening in relation to assets which were apparently not in his name and not to be dealt with in his will, the judge said.
Other issues raised in a counter-claim by Ms Rhatigan have yet to be dealt with and the case was adjourned to January 19th.