Nay v Iskov

Nay v Iskov involved a dispute concerning the validity of a will and the applicability of the public policy rule of forfeiture in relation to a beneficiary who had killed the testator. The court was tasked with determining whether the beneficiary's involvement in the testator's death warranted the forfeiture of their inheritance under the will. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the public policy rule of forfeiture should be applied in cases where a beneficiary had caused the death of the testator. This rule traditionally prevents a person from benefiting from their own wrongdoing, such as where they have committed a crime against the deceased. The court had to decide if the rule applied in cases of homicide by a beneficiary and if so, the extent of its application.

The court found that the public policy rule of forfeiture did indeed apply in this context. It held that allowing a beneficiary who had killed the testator to inherit from the estate would contravene public policy and undermine the fundamental principles of justice and morality. The court emphasised that the rule serves to prevent individuals from profiting from their own unlawful acts, particularly where those acts have resulted in the death of the testator. As a result, the beneficiary's entitlement to the inheritance was forfeited. The court's decision was grounded in the principle that the law should not permit a person to benefit from their own criminal conduct, especially in cases of homicide.

The final orders of the court were that the beneficiary's interest in the estate was forfeited, and the estate would be distributed in accordance with the terms of the will as if the beneficiary had predeceased the testator.