Mills v Dodds

The case of Mills v Dodds involved a dispute over the estate of a deceased woman, who had made a testamentary promise to her sister, the plaintiff, that if she looked after her, she would receive half of her estate. The deceased, who had a prognosis of three to six months to live, approached her sister for care. The plaintiff moved from Ocean Grove in Victoria to Port Macquarie to care for her sister for about ten months. The deceased’s will, however, did not reflect this alleged promise, instead providing the plaintiff with personal effects, $20,000, a motor vehicle, and the residue of the estate to a cancer trust and a wildlife charity. The defendant, the executrix and a friend of the deceased, disputed the alleged promise, asserting that there was no enforceable agreement and that the plaintiff and her witnesses had reconstructed their memories.

The court had to decide several key issues: whether there was a valid testamentary contract between the deceased and the plaintiff, whether equitable estoppel applied, whether there was a restitutionary claim for money had and received, and whether there was a breach of the rule in Browne v Dunn. The court found that the alleged promise conversation did occur and constituted an agreement, rejecting arguments that the terms of the agreement were not certain, that there was no real consideration, and that there was no intention to create legal relations. The court held that there was a valid testamentary contract which was breached by the deceased. The court found that equitable estoppel was not made out because the plaintiff had assumed there was an oral contract and that the deceased knew or intended for her to act in reliance on the promise. The court also found that there was no obligation for the plaintiff to repay sums withdrawn during the last days of the deceased’s life and after her death because the payments were authorised. Finally, the court held that there was no general rule that unchallenged and uncontradicted evidence must be accepted and that there was no breach of the rule in Browne v Dunn.

The court's final orders were that the plaintiff was entitled to half of the deceased's estate. The defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum of $493,204.01, representing half of the deceased’s estate, subject to the deduction of any sums paid by the plaintiff to the estate prior to the commencement of the proceedings. The court also ordered that the defendant was to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings.