Guillesser v Dawson - [2014] QSC 229

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Guillesser v Dawson & Anor [2014] QSC 229

PARTIES:

MARGARET GUILLESSER AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE JOHN DAWSON

(plaintiff)

v

IAN DAWSON

(first defendant)

and

ELLEN DONALD

(second defendant)

FILE NO/S:

BS 4603 of 2013

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court of Queensland

DELIVERED ON:

17 September 2014

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

17 June 2014

JUDGE:

Philip McMurdo J

ORDER:

Grant to the plaintiff letters of administration with the will of John Dawson made on 22 April 2004.

CATCHWORDS:

SUCCESSION – CONSTRUCTION AND EFFECT OF TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS – TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS GENERALLY – LAPSE – where the testator husband and his wife were killed in a plane crash – where the testator left his entire estate to his wife – in the event that the wife predeceased the testator, the estate was left to the plaintiff among others – whether the wife’s entitlement under the will “lapsed” by the operation of s 33B of the Succession Act 1981 (Qld) – whether the testator died intestate.

Succession Act 1981 (Qld), s 33B, s 65

Desmarchelier v Stone [2005] 2 Qd R 243, distinguished.

COUNSEL:

D B Fraser QC for the plaintiff

M Wilson for the defendants

SOLICITORS:

Biddle Lawyers for the plaintiff

Porta Lawyers for the defendants

On 1 October 2012, John Dawson and his wife Carol Dawson were killed when the plane in which they were passengers crashed south of Gympie. The question in this case is what should happen to Mr Dawson’s estate. The plaintiff, Ms Guillesser, is a sister of the late Carol Dawson. She and others claim to be entitled, in various shares, to John Dawson’s estate.

The second defendant is the mother of John Dawson, who claims to be entitled to the entirety of the estate on the basis that any gift under his will has lapsed, so that his property is to be distributed as on intestacy. The first defendant does not contest the plaintiff’s claim.

There are no contested facts. The outcome turns on the terms of John Dawson’s will and the impact of ss 33B and 65 of the Succession Act 1981 (Qld).

John Dawson’s will was made on 22 April 2004 when he was aged 55 years. There is no suggestion that the will is invalid. The only question is its effect.

The will was in a printed standard form which called for the insertion of the details including the gift or gifts. Clause 4 provided for the insertion of details relevant to “special gifts”. Under the words “I leave the following special gifts free of all duties and charges to”, Mr Dawson wrote:

“Carol A. Dawson of 19 Emcona St Tingalpa
my entire estate - wife”.

Clause 5 provided for a gift of the residue of the estate. As completed by Mr Dawson, it began as follows:

“I give the residue of my estate to Carol A. Dawson my wife
Born 04/08/1949 after payments of all my just debts, funeral…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Guillesser v Dawson

Details

AGLC: Guillesser v Dawson [2014] QSC 229
Case: [2014] QSC 229
Decision Date: 17 September 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Guillesser v Dawson was heard in a relevant Australian court where the primary issue was the interpretation and effect of testamentary dispositions in the will of John Dawson. The dispute arose following the tragic deaths of John Dawson and his wife in a plane crash, with the plaintiff asserting claims to the estate under the will. The core of the case revolved around the interpretation of the will, specifically whether the wife's entitlement to the estate lapsed due to her predeceasing John, and if John ultimately died intestate.

The court was tasked with determining the legal effect of the wife's predecease on the distribution of John's estate as outlined in his will. The central legal issue was whether section 33B of the Succession Act 1981 (Qld) applied to cause the wife’s entitlement to lapse, thereby impacting the distribution of the estate as per John’s will. This required careful consideration of the statutory provisions and their interaction with the expressed wishes in John’s will.

The court found that the wife’s entitlement under the will did not lapse by the operation of section 33B of the Succession Act. Instead, it concluded that the wife’s interest in the estate was effectively vested at the time of John’s death, thus she did not die intestate. Consequently, the court ruled that the plaintiff was entitled to the estate under the terms of John's will. The court's reasoning hinged on the interpretation of the will and the application of statutory provisions concerning testamentary dispositions.

Accordingly, the court granted the plaintiff letters of administration with the will of John Dawson, affirming the plaintiff's entitlement to the estate as specified in the will. This decision underscores the importance of precise drafting in wills and the court's role in interpreting such documents in light of statutory requirements.

Orders

Orders of the court

Grant to the plaintiff letters of administration with the will of John Dawson made on 22 April 2004.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Guillesser v Dawson & Anor [2014] QSC 229
PARTIES:	MARGARET GUILLESSER AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE JOHN DAWSON (plaintiff) v IAN DAWSON (first defendant) and ELLEN DONALD (second defendant)
FILE NO/S:	BS 4603 of 2013
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Trial
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court of Queensland
DELIVERED ON:	17 September 2014
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	17 June 2014
JUDGE:	Philip McMurdo J
ORDER:	Grant to the plaintiff letters of administration with the will of John Dawson made on 22 April 2004.
CATCHWORDS:	SUCCESSION – CONSTRUCTION AND EFFECT OF TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS – TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS GENERALLY – LAPSE – where the testator husband and his wife were killed in a plane crash – where the testator left his entire estate to his wife – in the event that the wife predeceased the testator, the estate was left to the plaintiff among others – whether the wife’s entitlement under the will “lapsed” by the operation of s 33B of the Succession Act 1981 (Qld) – whether the testator died intestate. Succession Act 1981 (Qld), s 33B, s 65 Desmarchelier v Stone [2005] 2 Qd R 243, distinguished.
COUNSEL:	D B Fraser QC for the plaintiff M Wilson for the defendants
SOLICITORS:	Biddle Lawyers for the plaintiff Porta Lawyers for the defendants