A woman contesting her late sister’s will has engaged in four years of litigation “to effectively challenge her sister’s autonomy” in deciding to leave her estate to a long-term friend, the High Court has been told.
Majella Rippington, older sister of the late Celine Murphy (50), sought to "damnify her sister's mental capacity" despite having been furnished with medical reports showing she had such capacity, Cormac Ó Dúlacháin SC said.
Mrs Rippington, replying to closing submissions by Mr Ó Dúlacháin, said she had come to court to contest the will because Ms Murphy had “allowed disingenuous people into her life”. Her sister “became a victim” and so did her family and they had a right to look for justice, she said.
Ms Murphy, a hairstylist, was single with no children and died from cancer on March 15th, 2011. She left an estate valued by the beneficiary at €283,000, including an apartment in Citywest, Dublin.
Mrs Rippington and Mr Ó Dúlacháin, who represents beneficiary Mary Butler, as well as executor Tridentine Bishop Michael Cox, made closing submissions on Friday, the last day of the four-day will challenge.
Mr Justice Séamus Noonan said he he would give judgment as soon as he could.
Mrs Rippington, her husband Shaun, and Ms Murphy's other sister Edel Banahan, want the will declared invalid on grounds of alleged duress and undue influence.
Mrs Butler and the bishop deny the claims, plead Celine Murphy was of sound mind, and have counterclaimed seeking to have the will declared valid.
Mrs Rippington, in her submissions, said she had been forced to bring proceedings because she had not been given “any real information” as to the circumstances in which the handwritten will had been made.
The witnessing of the will in the Kildare home of Mrs Butler, the day before Celine Murphy was admitted to hospital a week before she died, raised many questions, she said. Phone records showed the time claimed by the defendant for the signing “was all over the shop”.
Mr Ó Dúlacháin said Ms Rippington had over the last few days sought to undermine “one of the core things important to Celine – that was the relationships she had developed with friends and associates”.
She had tried to claim Mrs Butler was not a friend despite evidence of two independent witnesses; and had also questioned whether those witnesses were Celine’s friends. No evidence of duress or undue influence had been presented, only innuendo, counsel said.
The will, handwritten by Celine Murphy, was itself evidence of her last will and testament.
There was evidence Mrs Butler was a long-standing friend and there is nothing to stop a single person “deciding to make a bequest of everything she owns to someone she described as her best friend”, counsel said.
Earlier, under cross-examination by Mrs Rippington, Bishop Cox said he had read the will before witnessing it in Mrs Butler’s kitchen but had not discussed its contents at all with Celine Murphy.
As a clergyman, and having served a number of years in the Army and the harbour police, he was familiar with dealing with documents and this was why he had asked Celine Murphy to date the will when she signed it, he said.