Legal Research
Cases
Abernethy v Simpson

Abernethy v Simpson

Case [2007] NSWSC 186 8 March 2007

Ademption

Gift by Will

Testamentary Capacity

Admissibility of Evidence

Construction of Wills

Succession Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

CITATION: Abernethy v Simpson [2007] NSWSC 186

HEARING DATE(S): 31/1/07 [then written submissions]

JUDGMENT DATE :
8 March 2007

JURISDICTION: Equity Division

JUDGMENT OF: Young CJ in Eq

DECISION: Declaration made in accordance with amended summons.

CATCHWORDS: SUCCESSION [151]- Will- Construction- Gift by testator to plaintiff son of "such interest as I may have at the time of my death in the estate of my late father"- Father's estate distributed before testator's death- Whether gift passed testator's interest in real property that vested in him under his father's will- Whether solicitor's file note admissible for purpose of clarifying testator's intentions- Doctrine of ademption considered.

LEGISLATION CITED: Family Provision Act 1982

CASES CITED: Clarke v Browne (1854) 2 Sm & Giff 524; 65 ER 510
Harrison v Jackson (1877) Ch D 339
Moore v Moore (1860) 29 Beav 496; 54 ER 720
Morgan v Thomas (1877) 6 Ch D 176
Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd v Attorney General (NSW) (Bryson J, 27.3.1987, unreported)
Rabin v Gerson Berger Association Ltd [1986] 1 WLR 526
Re Bell [1969] VR 597
Re Bridle (1879) LR 4 CPD 336
Re Bythway (1911) 80 LJ Ch 246
Re Hackett [1966] VR 232
Re Kenyon's Estate (1887) 56 LT 626
Re Nesbitt [1953] 1 WLR 595; [1953] 1 All ER 936
Re Ofner [1909] 1 Ch 60
Re Slater [1906] 2 Ch 480
Re Tetsall [1961] 1 WLR 938
The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children v The Scottish National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children [1915] AC 207

PARTIES: Daniel Robert James Abernethy (P)
Margaret Anne Simpson (D1)
Peter Grant (D2)
Maria Veronica Muir (D3)

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 6386/05

COUNSEL: M Lawson (P)
C Hodgson (D3)

SOLICITORS: Stacks//Northern Rivers (P)
Bolster & Co (D3)

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
EQUITY DIVISION

YOUNG CJ in EQ

Thursday 8 March 2007

6386/05 – ABERNETHY v SIMPSON

JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: This is the hearing of a separate question arising in the administration of the estate of the late Colin Charles Abernethy. The present proceedings seek construction of the will and also an order under the Family Provision Act 1982: it is necessary to deal first with the question of construction and this has been isolated as a separate issue with the Family Provision Act matter postponed.

2 The parties lived in the Tweed Heads area and the family had a large parcel of land at Terranora.

3 A convenient place to start is with the present plaintiff's grandfather, Ronald Walter Abernethy, who was the registered proprietor of 9 titles constituting a block of 36.58 hectares. The grandfather, as I will continue to call him, died on 27 May 1997 and probate was granted to the plaintiff's grandmother, Freda. There was an executor's transmission application of all the lands to Freda.

4 By transfer dated 27 March 2003, the land was transferred to the beneficiaries of the grandfather's estate. The transfer was registered on 2 May 2003.

5 The grandfather's will…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Abernethy v Simpson

Details

AGLC: Abernethy v Simpson [2007] NSWSC 186
Case: [2007] NSWSC 186
Decision Date: 8 March 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Abernethy v Simpson involves a dispute over the interpretation of a clause in a will. The testator, Mr. Simpson, left a gift to his son, Abernethy, which stated that Abernethy would receive "such interest as I may have at the time of my death in the estate of my late father." The central issue was whether this gift included any interest in real property that Simpson had received from his father's estate, which had already been distributed before Simpson's death. The court was required to determine the precise meaning of the clause and whether any interest in the real property had passed to Abernethy.

The primary legal issue was the interpretation of the will clause and whether it included any interest in the real property that Simpson had received from his father's estate. The court considered whether a solicitor's file note could be used to clarify the testator's intentions and whether the doctrine of ademption applied. Ademption refers to the situation where the property or interest that the testator intended to leave no longer exists or cannot be transferred at the time of the testator's death. In this case, the court had to decide whether the real property in question had been adeemed.

The court held that the gift to Abernethy did not include any interest in the real property that Simpson had received from his father's estate. The court found that the property had already vested in Simpson before his death, and thus, there was nothing to pass to Abernethy. The court also held that the solicitor's file note was admissible to clarify the testator's intentions and that the doctrine of ademption applied. The court concluded that the gift was intended to cover any interest that Simpson might have had at the time of his death, but since the real property had already vested in Simpson, there was nothing left to pass to Abernethy.

The court made an order that Abernethy was not entitled to any interest in the real property that Simpson had received from his father's estate. The court's decision hinged on the interpretation of the will clause and the application of the doctrine of ademption. The court's reasoning was based on the premise that the property had already vested in Simpson before his death, and thus, there was nothing to pass to Abernethy. The court's decision provides guidance on the interpretation of wills and the application of the doctrine of ademption in similar cases.

Orders