Flower v Allen

The case of Flower v Allen was heard by the Queensland Supreme Court. The applicant, Flower, sought declarations regarding the interpretation of the will of the deceased, Jean Elizabeth Allen, specifically concerning a condition attached to a property devise to her son, John Harding Allen. There was no opposition to the applicant’s request for the matter to be decided without an oral hearing. The central legal issue was whether the condition attached to the devise in the will was triggered only if the specified property had not been transferred by John Harding Allen to the deceased prior to her death.

The court considered the language of the will and the circumstances surrounding the transfer of the property. It found that the will’s language indicated that the condition applied only if the property had not been transferred by John Harding Allen to the deceased before her death. Given that the property had indeed been transferred by John Harding Allen to the deceased prior to her death, the court concluded that the condition was not met, and thus John Harding Allen was entitled to the property as per the will. The court also ruled that the costs of the application should be paid from the deceased’s estate as a testamentary expense.