BILNEY & BRISCO

In *Bilney & Brisco*, Berman J of the Supreme Court of Victoria considered a dispute concerning the interpretation of a will. The applicants, Bilney and Brisco, sought to have the will of the late Mr. Arthur Brisco construed by the Court. The central issue revolved around the proper distribution of the deceased's residuary estate, specifically whether certain beneficiaries were entitled to a share of the residue.

The primary legal question before the Court was whether the testator's intention, as expressed in the will, was to create a class gift or individual gifts to the named beneficiaries in relation to the residue. This determination was crucial for ascertaining who would ultimately inherit the remaining assets of the estate. The Court had to consider the specific wording of the relevant clause in the will and apply established principles of testamentary construction to discern the testator's true wishes.

Berman J reasoned that the language used in the will, particularly the enumeration of beneficiaries and the absence of words indicating a collective gift, pointed towards individual entitlements rather than a class gift. The Court applied the principle that where beneficiaries are individually named, the presumption is generally against a class gift unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Consequently, the Court found that the beneficiaries were entitled to individual shares of the residue, and not a collective share to be divided amongst them.