Borlaug v The University of Western Australia
Case
•
[2001] WASCA 425
•20 DECEMBER 2001
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Borlaug v The University of Western Australia [2001] WASCA 425
[2001] WASCA 425
20 DECEMBER 2001
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In this case, the appellant, Borlaug, appealed against an order made by the Supreme Court of Western Australia which declared that a bequest made in the will of the deceased, including "all my shares and stock in all companies," did not include debenture stock or funds invested in various unit trusts. The University of Western Australia was the respondent in the case and sought to enforce the terms of the will. The Supreme Court had found that the bequest did not include the debenture stock and unit trust holdings, and this decision was appealed by Borlaug.
The legal issues that the court had to determine were whether the bequest in the will included debenture stock and funds invested in various unit trusts, and if so, what principles should be applied to the construction of the will in order to determine the true intention of the testatrix. The court was required to consider the language of the will, the circumstances surrounding its execution, and any other relevant evidence that could assist in determining the testatrix's intention.
The court found that the bequest in the will did include debenture stock, but did not include holdings in unit trusts. The court considered the language of the will, which referred to "shares and stock in all companies," and held that this included debenture stock, which is a type of security that represents a loan made to a company. However, the court held that the bequest did not include holdings in unit trusts, as these were not shares or stock in the same sense as debenture stock. The court also noted that the testatrix had made specific bequests of other assets, which supported the conclusion that she did not intend to include unit trust holdings in the general bequest of shares and stock. The appeal was therefore allowed, and the order of the Supreme Court was set aside.
The legal issues that the court had to determine were whether the bequest in the will included debenture stock and funds invested in various unit trusts, and if so, what principles should be applied to the construction of the will in order to determine the true intention of the testatrix. The court was required to consider the language of the will, the circumstances surrounding its execution, and any other relevant evidence that could assist in determining the testatrix's intention.
The court found that the bequest in the will did include debenture stock, but did not include holdings in unit trusts. The court considered the language of the will, which referred to "shares and stock in all companies," and held that this included debenture stock, which is a type of security that represents a loan made to a company. However, the court held that the bequest did not include holdings in unit trusts, as these were not shares or stock in the same sense as debenture stock. The court also noted that the testatrix had made specific bequests of other assets, which supported the conclusion that she did not intend to include unit trust holdings in the general bequest of shares and stock. The appeal was therefore allowed, and the order of the Supreme Court was set aside.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Wills & Succession
Legal Concepts
-
Construction of Wills
-
Implied Terms
-
Specific Performance
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Mews as Co-Trustee of Jeff Mews Will Trust v Mews [2025] WASC 240
Cases Citing This Decision
44
Lemon v Mead
[2017] WASCA 215
Mews as Co-Trustee of Jeff Mews Will Trust v Mews
[2025] WASC 240
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
1
Currie v Glen
[1936] HCA 1
Currie v Glen
[1936] HCA 1
MSP Nominees Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Stamps (SA)
[1999] HCA 51