An ailing Graeme Wislang could not get the Public Trust to update his will before he died.

A dying man's attempts to change his will with the Public Trust were not answered.

In the last year of his life, Graeme William Wislang emailed the Public Trust four times, but had still not managed to get the document changed by the time he died.

Wislang, of Strathmore Park in Wellington, was 75 when he died on November 2, 2015. He wanted to make bequests to his children, St John Ambulance, the Wellington Free Ambulance, and the Wellington SPCA.

123rf.com Graeme Wislang wanted to finalise his affairs.

He also left detailed instructions about what was to happen to his dog Pepsie, who rated a special mention in his death notice.

READ MORE:

* Making a will the digital way

* Making sure your will works well

* Half of Kiwis don't have a will

* Dad who wanted to leave his fortune to animal rights

A judge in the High Court was asked to recognise the document he had first emailed to the Public Trust on November 14, 2014, as his valid will.

123RF One of Graeme Wislang's last wishes was to make arrangements for the care of his dog after he'd gone.

In her decision, Justice Karen Clark said it was "unfortunate, to say the least, that despite Mr Wislang's attempts to formalise his will, his communications with the Public Trust were ineffective".

Wislang had been recently discharged from hospital when he emailed the trust on November 14, 2014, saying he wanted to change the will he had made in February that year, with the trust as executor and trustee.

He attached his intended will, but it was not signed or witnessed.

His mobility and health continued to deteriorate, and he went into hospital two more times before his death.

Justice Clark said his first email received an "out of office" response. More than a month later, he tried again, attaching his first email with the revised will, but received no response.

He wrote again on August 1, 2015, when he received a reply that his contact at the trust had left it two months earlier, and he was given a forwarding contact.

He emailed that address on August 2, confirming again that the November 2014 will was the latest version. He received no response.

The judge said one of the requirements for a valid will was that it had to be signed and witnessed, in accordance with the Wills Act.

Wislang's was not, but she was satisfied that the November 2014 document expressed his intentions, and she declared it a valid will.