Attorney-General (SA) v Bray [1964] HCA 3

Attorney-General (SA) v Bray [1964] HCA 3

The bequest to set up a home for homeless, stray and unwanted animals in the will was a valid charitable trust, not void for uncertainty or for infringing the rule against perpetuities, and it was found that impracticability had not been established at the date of death or for the immediate future. Therefore, the gift did not fail, and the fund was not to be distributed as on intestacy at this stage.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Appeal After Decision of Full Court of Supreme Court of South Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['charitable Trusts' 'impracticability of Trusts' 'cy Près Doctrine' 'rule Against Perpetuities' 'accumulation of Income' 'construction of Wills']
['equity' 'charity Law' 'wills and Estates'] ['charitable Trusts' 'impracticability of Trusts' 'cy Près Doctrine' 'rule Against Perpetuities' 'accumulation of Income' 'construction of Wills']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Appeal After Decision of Full Court of Supreme Court of South Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trust for a home for homeless, stray and unwanted animals in the will of May Annie Sarah Hodge is a valid charitable trust.' 'Whether the trust was void for uncertainty or as infringing the rule against perpetuities.' 'Whether the trust failed for impracticability as at the date of the death of the testatrix.' 'Whether there is a general charitable intention to allow cy-près application if the specific purpose fails.' 'Whether postponement and accumulation provisions in the will invalidate the charitable gift.']

Ratio Decidendi

The bequest to set up a home for homeless, stray and unwanted animals in the will was a valid charitable trust, not void for uncertainty or for infringing the rule against perpetuities, and it was found that impracticability had not been established at the date of death or for the immediate future. Therefore, the gift did not fail, and the fund was not to be distributed as on intestacy at this stage.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Allow the appeal to this Court and dismiss the cross-appeal.' 'Discharge the judgment of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia dated 9th May 1963.' 'Allow the appeal to that Court from the judgment and order of the Chief Justice of South Australia made on 22nd November 1962 and discharge that...