Day v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd

In the case of Day v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd, the dispute arose in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The testatrix, Mrs Day, left her estate to her "grandchildren" under her will. The key issue was whether the will was ambiguous in naming the grandchildren, given that the testatrix had three children, not one, and the term "grandchildren" could be interpreted differently. The court needed to determine if the term "grandchildren" was ambiguous and, if so, whether extrinsic evidence could be used to resolve the ambiguity.

The legal issues before the court included whether the term "grandchildren" was equivocal and if extrinsic evidence could clarify the testatrix's intention. The court examined whether the prior reference to the testatrix's "only child" could be considered in determining the meaning of the term "grandchildren." The court had to balance the principles of testamentary freedom with the need to give effect to the testatrix's intentions as accurately as possible. The court also needed to decide if the evidence provided was sufficient to resolve the ambiguity in the will.

The court held that the term "grandchildren" was equivocal because it could be interpreted in more than one way. The court allowed the admission of extrinsic evidence to resolve the ambiguity, considering the prior reference to the testatrix's "only child" and the actual number of children she had. The evidence showed that the term "grandchildren" was intended to include all of the testatrix's grandchildren, not just those of a single child. The court concluded that the term was equivocal and that extrinsic evidence was admissible to resolve the ambiguity. The final orders were made in favour of the plaintiffs, ensuring that all grandchildren were included in the distribution of the estate according to the testatrix's intentions.