Family accuse Wangaratta bull rider Stephen Atkins of pressuring 91yo into leaving him $8m in will

A farmhand is accused of shocking abuse of his 91-year-old boss – and her family also allege he unduly influenced her into leaving him her $8m estate.

The family of Clarise ‘Mary’ Robustelle say Stephen Atkins coerced the 91-year-old into leaving him her $8m Wangaratta estate.

A Wangaratta farmhand allegedly coerced his elderly boss, who had no husband or children, into leaving him her $8m estate after beating and controlling her for more than a decade.

The niece of Clarice ‘Mary’ Robustelle, 91, has claimed her aunt was “unduly influenced” by farm manager Stephen Atkins, 58, to make two new wills in 2012 and 2018.

Jeanette Clarke, who was a beneficiary under Ms Robustelle’s 2008 will, has accused Mr Atkins of subjecting her aunt to “repeated acts of aggression, violence, control and abusive behaviour” over about 12 years.

Around the time the 2012 will was made, it is claimed Mr Atkins “physically assaulted” his boss, called her a “bitch” and said she “would get what she deserved”.

Mr Atkins, who was a professional bull rider, was arrested after the incident but no charges were laid.

Years later, Ms Clarke also claims Ms Robustelle suffered injuries, including significant bruising to her breasts, ribs and arms, which were “consistent with assault”.

The frail woman told her niece she only had two chairs in her home because Mr Atkins would throw them in anger and break them.

He lived in a house on the large farming property near Wangaratta – 250km northeast of Melbourne – with his partner and his son, Bryden.

According to court documents, Mr Atkins’ partner called Ms Robustelle an “old bitch that wouldn’t die” as she lamented the fact they were yet to own her farm.

The documents also allege Mr Atkins once abandoned his employer – who struggled to walk due to having polio as a child – on a remote part of the property.

The details of the dispute emerged as Supreme Court judge Steven Moore last week ruled there was a “prima facie” case the elderly woman made the two wills as a result of Mr Atkins’ undue influence.

Stephen 'Steve' Atkins was a professional bull rider and farmhand. Picture: Mike Kenyon

Under the 2018 will, Mr Atkins was bequeathed the entire estate valued at around $8m, save $10,000 to be given to Ms Robustelle’s cousin and $1000 to be given to the local hospital.

But, under the 2008 will, Ms Clarke was left $140,000 and the contents of the house, while Mr Atkins was only bequeathed $100,000, two farming properties, livestock and two motor vehicles.

A handful of other relatives were also left money under the 2008 will.

Mr Atkins died in 2020, a year before Ms Robustelle, and Ms Clarke is now locked in a legal battle with his son, Bryden.

Ms Clarke, in her submissions, argued the 2012 and 2018 wills are invalid because her aunt was “subject to the control and surveillance” and “actual coercion” by Mr Atkins.

She also relied on an affidavit sworn by Ms Robustelle’s accountant, who said the woman showed him the 2012 will and told him it was “signed under duress and she was not happy with it”.

Ms Clarke also argued her aunt had no “testamentary capacity” in 2018, due to suffering from Alzheimer’s disease.

Clarice 'Mary' Robustelle, from Wangaratta, was allegedly coerced into leaving her farmhand her $8m estate.

However, Bryden argued for there to be a “prima facie” case, Ms Clarke had to “prove actual coercion, as distinct from the possibility or opportunity for its exercise”.

He said she failed to make out a case the 2012 and 2018 wills were made as a result of the alleged aggressive and violent behaviour of his father.

But Judge Moore said there was a “narrative warranting further investigation” as to whether the making of the 2012 and 2018 wills were the “result of undue influence by Stephen over the deceased’s wishes”.

“The narrative is not based upon a single threat or act of violence, but instead is characterised by the alleged exercise, over about twelve years, of coercive control by a middle-aged man over an elderly and frail woman who was dependent upon him in critical respects,” he wrote in his judgment.

Having made out a “prima facie” case, Ms Clarke, if she wishes, can proceed to trial.