Mrs. Chake Avakian v. Mr. Artin Avakian

YEAR

Court: Ethiopian Supreme Court

Facts: Setrak made a will designating Chake as his sole heir. But the requisite number of signatures (four, here) were not on the document. When he dies, property goes to Artin as a result.

Posture: The high court (on appeal) said that the will was invalid, and the widow appeals.

Issue: Do we honor this will, given that intent was clear but form was invalid?

Holding: Yes, it is valid.

Rule: The intent is more important than the form-- that's why we have the form, in fact, to make sure that the intent is real.

Reasoning: The intent is obvious-- nobody disputes it. And if you've got three reliable witnesses, a fourth wouldn't make the will any more reliable.

Dicta: