David Rofe will war foes ‘blinded by their self-interest’

Those battling for a slice of barrister David Rofe’s $30m fortune may have overlooked the ailing silk’s ‘bouts of incapacity’ brought on by ­dementia, a court has heard.

Ex-HSU boss Kathy Jackson. Picture: Britta Campion

The “big players” battling for a slice of Sydney barrister David Rofe’s $30m fortune may have overlooked the ailing silk’s “bouts of incapacity” brought on by ­dementia because they were “blinded by self-interest” and ­allegedly seduced by the possibility of a sizeable inheritance, a court has heard.

A dozen beneficiaries are squabbling over how to divide the wealthy barrister’s estate in the NSW Supreme Court, where they are accusing each other of using nefarious methods and undue influence to trick, charm or force their way into Rofe’s prized final will.

The warring beneficiaries include Kathy Jackson, the former Health Services Union chief and Rofe’s estate executor, who is aligned with Rofe’s carer and ex-partner Gregg Hele, the barrister’s “virtual son” and Mr Hele’s arch-enemy Nick Llewellyn, and rival nephews James and Philip Rofe.

Rofe died aged 85 in July 2017 after suffering from advanced dementia, leaving behind a vast estate worth $30m. He had no immediate family and no dependants, but he acquired a disparate collection of relatives, friends and others whose names were written into — and often out of — many wills he signed in his lifetime.

In closing submissions on Thursday, judge Geoff Lindsay said Rofe, described in court as a man who lived in a “world of showmanship”, had suffered “bouts of incapacity” while he was trying to cobble together a final will in the wake of a dementia ­diagnosis in 2010.

All up, the barrister wrote about 40 wills throughout his life.

“We haven’t spent much time reflecting on the possibility (that) David Rofe’s will-making is itself indicative of a lack of capacity,” he said.

Ms Jackson met Rofe in May 2012 — almost two years after he was diagnosed with dementia — and quickly graduated from the silk’s acquaintance to a self-styled “day wife”.

Within two years, she became one of the biggest beneficiaries in the barrister’s final will and is poised to inherit up to $3m after she helped him write the contentious document in December 2014.

Of the 13 warring parties that are vying for a share of Rofe’s estate, Justice Lindsay said all of them could be considered as a credible members of the barrister’s “family”.

“There’s nobody who suddenly comes from overseas, pops in, gets a will, pops out,” he said.

“The person who is most vulnerable to that criticism is Kathy Jackson.”

However, Justice Lindsay said a key rival of Ms Jackson, Mr Llew­ellyn, had also admitted to being “unpredictable”, noting that it was “entirely possible” he may have tried to blackmail Rofe.

Mr Llewellyn, who has previously claimed to have been Rofe’s “virtual son”, could walk away debt-free with $6m if the court upholds a will written in March 2014.

If the court upholds the December 2014 will, he would inherit $3m and be forced to pay back a debt of almost $2.5m.

Justice Lindsay said he would also need to “weigh up” the reliability of the evidence of Michael Lawler, who acted as Rofe’s power of attorney while he was Ms Jackson’s partner and vice-president of the Fair Work Commission. Mr Lawler was accused of being a “thief” by Rofe after he dipped into the barrister’s bank account in June 2014 to buy a $1.35m house in the old man’s name, coincidentally next door to the Jackson-Lawler residence at Wombarra, south of Sydney.

“On one view, it would look they get a demented rich man to move next door, but that’s if you look at it in a negative spirit,” Justice Lindsay said.

“If you look at it in a positive spirit, something had to be done (to help) this bloke. He couldn’t even get himself a cup of tea.”

The undoubted winner out of the ugly estate dispute, no matter what happens, would appear to be Mr Hele, who stands to receive 20 per cent of the estate, or about $6m.