Glen v Bilton Re Estate of Hextall [2005] NSWSC 1365

Glen v Bilton Re Estate of Hextall [2005] NSWSC 1365

The court was not satisfied that Mrs Hextall intended her will to read as propounded by either the plaintiff or the cross-claimant, and thus no claim for rectification was made out.

Parties
Plaintiff/cross Defendant: Deborah Dawn Glen; First Defendant/cross Claimant: Donald Bilton; Second Defendant: Megan Tyler; Third Defendant: Luke Gorman; Fourth Defendant: Benjamin Gorman
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Probate / Judgment
Outcome
Rectification refused; summons and cross claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Construction of Will, Rectification of Will
Wills and Probate Construction of Will Rectification of Will

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deborah Dawn Glen

Plaintiff/cross Defendant

Donald Bilton

First Defendant/cross Claimant

Megan Tyler

Second Defendant

Luke Gorman

Third Defendant

Benjamin Gorman

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will of Mrs Hextall should be rectified to reflect alleged testamentary intentions
  2. 2 Interpretation of clause 4 of the will

Ratio Decidendi

The court was not satisfied that Mrs Hextall intended her will to read as propounded by either the plaintiff or the cross-claimant, and thus no claim for rectification was made out.

Court Disposition

Rectification refused; summons and cross claim dismissed

Orders

  • The costs of all parties are to be paid out of the estate of the deceased.