Helmers v Coppins

In *Helmers v Coppins*, the High Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning the interpretation of a will. The primary issue revolved around whether a specific bequest of shares in a company, which had undergone a capital reconstruction prior to the testator's death, should be interpreted as referring to the shares as they existed at the time of the will's execution or as they were constituted after the reconstruction.

The court was required to determine the testator's intention regarding the subject matter of the bequest in light of the company's capital reconstruction. Specifically, the question was whether the beneficiaries were entitled to the original number of shares or the new shares issued as a result of the reconstruction, and how the value of the bequest should be assessed in light of this change.

The High Court held that the testator's intention, as evidenced by the will, was to bequeath the shares in the company as they existed at the time of his death. The court applied the principle that a will speaks from the death of the testator, and therefore, any changes to the subject matter of a bequest that occur between the date of the will and the testator's death should be considered in determining the testator's ultimate intention. The court found that the capital reconstruction had fundamentally altered the nature of the shares, and the bequest should be construed as referring to the shares in their altered form. The court ordered that the beneficiaries were entitled to the shares as they existed at the time of the testator's death.