What was determined in Vout v Hay regarding the presumption of knowledge of will contents?

In Vout v Hay, the court established important principles regarding the presumption of knowledge and approval of a will's contents by the testator. The correct choice highlights that the presumption can be rebutted in the presence of suspicious circumstances. This means that if there are elements that suggest the testator may not have been fully aware of or may have been coerced regarding the contents of the will, this presumption of knowledge and approval can be challenged.

The ruling reinforces the idea that while there is an initial presumption that a testator knows and approves the contents of their will, this assumption is not absolute. If evidence indicates that something unusual or questionable occurred—such as lack of capacity, coercion, or undue influence—the presumption can be set aside, allowing for a deeper examination of the circumstances surrounding the will's execution.

By recognizing the possibility of rebutting the presumption, Vout v Hay provides a safeguard against potential abuses in will-making, ensuring that the true intention of the testator is respected and upheld in cases where there are signs of misconduct or manipulation. This approach underscores the importance of fair and just processes in will execution while protecting the rights of the testator.