Prior to the Wills Act 2007 (the Act), a will had to be signed in the presence of two witnesses for it to be valid. Although this is still a requirement under section 11 of the Act, section 14 empowers the High Court to declare certain “informal wills” valid. This is perhaps the single most important change introduced by the Act. The recent case of Re Brown (HC, 13/10/2010) showed just how far the High Court was prepared to go to ensure that the willmaker’s intentions were honoured. In that case, on 9 November 2009, Mr Brown went to see Michelle Kit, a legal adviser employed by the Public Trust at its East Auckland Office. Mr Brown gave Ms Kit his instructions for his new will which she entered directly on to her computer and he was able to view them as they came up on the screen. Mr Brown checked and approved the instructions that he had given to Ms Kit as she entered them on her computer screen and she believed that those instructions reflected his testamentary intentions at the time of their meeting. She then prepared a formal will reflecting these instructions and made an appointment for Mr Brown to come in and sign the will on 16 November 2009. However, Mr Brown had become unwell by that time and passed away at his home on 18 November 2009. As at the date of his death, neither Ms Kit nor the deceased’s wife had received any indication from Mr Brown that he wished to change the instructions that he had given to Ms Kit on 9 November 2009. Judge Lang declared the draft will that Ms Kit had prepared valid as the last will and testament of Mr Brown, even though it was unsigned, as he held that it reflected Mr Brown’s testamentary intentions at the date of his death. As a consequence, the deceased’s widow, who was the sole beneficiary under the will, received the entire estate of the late Mr Brown. If this case had come before the Courts prior to the Act coming into force on 1 November 2007 the draft and unsigned will would have been declared invalid.