Dun v Dun

This case involved an appeal from the High Court of Australia in Dun v. Dun, concerning the interpretation of the Testator's Family Maintenance and Guardianship of Infants Act 1916-1954 (N.S.W.) in relation to the adequacy of provision made for a dependant of a deceased testator. The central legal issue was the date at which the adequacy of the provision made by the testator should be determined: whether it should be assessed at the time of the testator's death or at the time of the application for increased provision.

The court's reasoning centered on interpreting the statute and understanding the intention behind it. The House of Lords, after considering the arguments and the precedents, concluded that the correct date for determining the adequacy of the provision was the date of the testator's death. They rejected the argument that the date of the application should be the material date, emphasizing that the intention of the legislation was to enable the court to vary the provisions of a will in cases where it was satisfied that the testator had not made proper provisions for a dependant. The court found that judging the testator by the position at the time of the application, rather than at the time of death, would be contrary to this intention.

Moreover, the House of Lords held that the testator should be presumed to have taken into account contingent events that he might reasonably have foreseen at the time of his death. They concluded that in this particular case, the testator could not have reasonably foreseen the vast increase in the value of his estate, and therefore, the provision made for the dependant was not inadequate.

Ultimately, the House of Lords dismissed the appeal and advised Her Majesty that the appeal should be dismissed, with costs to be paid and retained out of the estate of the testator.