Key Takeaways:
- A terminally ill man with Asperger’s, Johan de Rooy, signed his modest possessions over to his ex-wife, Alaine Janette Coleman, while he was dying from brain cancer.
- A judge has found that Coleman was the driving force behind the changes to De Rooy’s will and that it was obtained by "undue influence".
- De Rooy’s family challenged the validity of the new will in court, claiming that Coleman had regained control over her ex-husband while he was terminally ill and isolated him from his family and support network.
- The court found that De Rooy was incapable of opposing Coleman when he was in her presence and that the 2021 will did not reflect his actual intentions.
- The judge declared the new will invalid, and De Rooy’s family is relieved that the court has acknowledged his true voice.
Introduction to the Case
A recent court ruling has shed light on a disturbing case of undue influence and manipulation. Johan de Rooy, a terminally ill man with Asperger’s, signed his modest possessions over to his ex-wife, Alaine Janette Coleman, while he was dying from brain cancer. De Rooy’s family had raised suspicions about the changes to his will, which led to a court challenge. The court’s decision has revealed a complex and troubling story of control and manipulation, with Coleman being found to have been the driving force behind the changes to De Rooy’s will.
The Background of the Case
De Rooy and Coleman were married in 2006, but their relationship was marked by violence and control. In 2011, De Rooy faced charges for violence against Coleman, which were ultimately dismissed at trial. However, De Rooy had made allegations about Coleman’s behavior, claiming she was controlling, manipulative, and had repeatedly assaulted him. The couple officially divorced in 2014, but it appears that Coleman continued to exert control over De Rooy. De Rooy’s health began to decline, and he underwent brain surgery in 2021. It was during this time that he made significant changes to his will, cutting out his siblings and leaving his estate to Coleman.
The Changing of the Will
The changes to De Rooy’s will were made in a series of emails and phone calls, with De Rooy’s lawyer, Bridget Westenra, expressing concerns about the contents of the emails. Westenra visited De Rooy for a welfare check, but was told to leave by Coleman. A new will was made in June 2021, with Coleman arranging for De Rooy to be assessed for mental acuity. The doctor’s medical certificate declared that De Rooy had full capacity to make informed decisions, but the court later found that this assessment was flawed. The new will was made with a lawyer who had not met De Rooy before and had acted for Coleman in the past. The lawyer made no inquiries about previous wills or potential claims on De Rooy’s estate.
The Challenge to the Will
De Rooy’s brother, Michael, challenged the validity of the new will in court, claiming that Coleman had regained control over her ex-husband while he was terminally ill and isolated him from his family and support network. Michael presented evidence that De Rooy had previously expressed concerns about Coleman’s behavior and had made allegations about her controlling and manipulative nature. The court heard that De Rooy had told his brother that he felt vulnerable to Coleman’s overtures and attempts to manipulate him. Michael argued that the new will did not reflect De Rooy’s true intentions and that Coleman had unduly influenced him.
The Court’s Decision
Justice Timothy Brewer found that Coleman had a strong and dominating personality and that De Rooy was "in thrall to her". The judge found that Coleman had taken active steps to ensure De Rooy’s dependence on her, including instigating the cancellation of his enduring power of attorney and the dismissal of his lawyer. The court also found that De Rooy was incapable of opposing Coleman when he was in her presence and that the 2021 will did not reflect his actual intentions. The judge declared the new will invalid, finding that it was obtained by undue influence.
The Aftermath
The court’s decision has brought relief to De Rooy’s family, who had been concerned about Coleman’s influence over their brother. Michael de Rooy’s lawyer, Simon Davies-Colley, said that the family took the matter to court because they wanted the story to be told and to ensure that De Rooy’s true voice was heard. Coleman, on the other hand, has disputed the judgment, claiming that she was the victim of De Rooy’s controlling behavior and that she had supported him throughout their relationship. She is considering appealing the decision. The case highlights the importance of protecting vulnerable individuals from undue influence and manipulation, particularly in cases where there are significant power imbalances.